Allahabad High Court
WRIC/19003/2026 of M/S SIDDHESHWAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND 4 OTHERS Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 5 OTHERS on 13 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 19003 of 2026 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Himanshu Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manish Mehrotra, learned counsel for the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 19003 of 2026
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Himanshu Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manish Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondent bank and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for writ of certiorari to quash the auction sale notice dated 22nd April, 2026.
3. Learned Senior Advocate submits that urgency is there and as today is the date fixed for auction and there is no presiding officer is available at Debt Tribunal Allahabad to hear and decide the urgency application. It is further submitted that petitioner has also moved stay application seeking stay upon the auction sale notice.
4. Per contra, it is submitted by Sri Manish Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondent bank that though there is no presiding officer at Debt Recovery Tribunal but Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur is having jurisdiction of Debt Recovery Tribunal, Allahabad as well as Debt Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow on urgency basis and even today cause list is published and those who are interested in pursuing remedy they can seek an opportunity to argue their case through video conferencing. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Harshit Kumar Srivastava, Himanshu Srivastava, Madan Lal Srivastava, Om Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anadi Krishna Narayana, C.S.C. M/S Siddheshwar Construction Company And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. In view of the above, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the petitioner to move urgency application for expediting hearing of stay application within a period of two weeks from today before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur through video conferencing and in the event he moves urgency application as directed herein above, the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur shall dispose of the pending stay application of the petitioner within a next one week's time after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. May 14, 2026 Atmesh WRIC No. 19003 of 2026 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad