WRIC/28067/2026 of GAYA SHANKAR PANDEY Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 10 September 2026

1. Instructions have been placed in compliance of our previous order dated 23.07.2026, which are taken on record. As per instructions, one FIR had been registered against the accused Prithvipal and others as Case Crime No. 168/2022, u/s 420/406/506 IPC on 26.12.2022 at the instance of one Ram Lakhan Pal and another FIR bearing Case Crime No. 11/2026, u/s 406 IPC had been registered on 13.03.2026 at the instance of one Rajiv Singh. However, the petitioner has not lodged any FIR against the directors of financial institution and, therefore, no further investigation could be carried out in the matter on the complaint of the petitioner. However, in response to the pending FIRs as aforesaid, police is still conducting the investigation.

2. In reply to the instructions place before us, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are two modes to get the money released from the financial institution: first, by lodging the FIR and secondly by making representation before the competent authority under Section 7 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 2019'). It is submitted that the second mode being more effective and expeditious one, petitioner opted the same by moving an application before the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), however, in view of the notification issued by the State Government on 12.11.2021, the Governor since has appointed all Divisional Commissioners in the State as competent authority within their jurisdiction for the purposes of the said Act, except for section 30 of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Brijesh Kumar Yadav, Inarmal Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Gaya Shankar Pandey .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)

said Act and all Additional Commissioners (Administration) within their respective jurisdictions to assist the competent authority in discharging its function for the purposes of the said Act. It is therefore argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner has already moved the application before the Additional District Magistrate (F & R), the same may be directed to be placed before the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Prayagraj to do the needful in the matter.

3. Learned Standing Counsel does not have any objection to the above request.

4. In such above view of the matter and further in the given facts and circumstances of this case, we direct the Additional District Magistrate (F & R), Prayagraj to forward the papers of the petitioner along with his representation dated 11.05.2026, copy of which is appended as Annexure 6 to the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Prayagraj within two weeks of production of certified copy of the order, for necessary action in the matter in terms of the circular letter issued pursuant the provisions contained under the Act, 2019. The Additional Commissioner (Administration), Prayagraj upon receipt of papers would do the needful in the matter and thereafter the competent authority under the Act, 2019 shall proceed to finalise the same as expeditiously as possible.

5. With aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. September 11, 2026 A.K.Srivastava WRIC No. 28067 of 2026 2 (Garima Prashad,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad