Allahabad High Court
WRIC/11694/2026 of SUJEET KUMAR SONKAR Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS on 5 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 11694 of 2026 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. This petition has been filed for the following relief:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and issue the fishery lease
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 11694 of 2026
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, 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. This petition has been filed for the following relief:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and issue the fishery lease (Machhli Palan Patta) in favour of the petitioner regarding Gata No. 1760, area 1.3460 hectare, situated in Village Afzalpurwari, Tehsil Sirathu, District Kaushambi within a time bound period
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no.2/3 to consider and decide the representation/application of the petitioner regarding allotment of fishery lease (Machhli Palan Patta) of Gata No. 1760, area 1.3460 hectare situated in Village Afzalpurwari, Tehsil Sirathu, District Kaushambi within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.(Annexure No.1 to this writ petition)."
2. Instructions have been submitted by learned Standing Counsel, which are taken on record.
3. On the basis of instructions, it has been submitted that wrong advertisement was issued by the respondent authorities as the earlier period of lease has not expired on the date of advertisement and therefore, the same was withdrawn. It has also been stated by learned Standing Counsel that petitioner has been informed to withdraw the money deposited by him. Petitioner was the highest bidder and no lease has been executed in his favor. Merely being the highest bidder, the petitioner has Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Deepak Singh Patel, Dheerendra Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sujeet Kumar Sonkar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
no right to compel the respondents to grant lease to him.
4. In view thereof, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
5. The amount already deposited by the petitioner shall be refunded to the petitioner within three weeks from the date when the petitioner applies for the same along with a certified copy of this order. May 6, 2026 Nitika Sri. WRIC No. 11694 of 2026 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad