Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 23 To March 29, 2026

NOMINAL INDEX Shailesh Kumar Yadav Ips vs. Union Of India And Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 127 State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Tax And Registration Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko And Another vs. Anshul Jagannath 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 128 Lakshmi And 10 Others Versus State of U.P. and others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 129 Bihari Lal vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 130 Veer Pal Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 131 Geeta Rani And 2 Others Versus Smt. Maya Devi And 4 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 132 . Geeta Devi and another Versus State of U.P. and 5 others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 133 Kafi Ahmed Khan vs. State of U.P. and 2 others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 134 Paras @ Ram Paras Versus Ram Charitra and another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 135 Neha Jaykishore Mehrolia v. Rahul Sisodia 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 136 Shiv Shankar v. Mahavir @ Ghura Turha And 5 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 137 Hasina Khatoon vs State of UP and another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 138 Pradeep Agarwal vs. State of U.P. and Another and connected petitions 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 139 Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati Jagatguru Shankaracharya Jyotishpeethadheeshwar And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 5 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 140 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 141 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 142 Archana Mishra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 143 Kishan Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 144 Anju And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 145 Rakesh Kumar And Another vs. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 146 Rizwana And 2 Other vs. The State Of U.P. And 3 Other 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 147 Brajpal @ Birjju @ Bijendra and another vs State of U.P. and another along with connected cases 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 148 In re vs Ashutosh Kumar Mishra 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 149 Shiva Kant Dubey vs. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 150 ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK Punishment U/S 20 RTI Act Can Be Imposed Only When Deliberate Obstruction/ Delay In Providing Information: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Shailesh Kumar Yadav Ips vs. Union Of India And Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 127 Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 127 The Allahabad High Court has held that punishment under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 can only be imposed if there is deliberate obstruction or delay in supplying information sought under the RTI Act. It cannot be imposed based on rushed or prejudged decisions which compromise statutory safeguards or rule of law. Courts Can Extend Time For Disciplinary Proceedings Suo Motu To Ensure Misconduct Doesn't Go Unpunished: Allahabad High Court Case Title: State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Tax And Registration Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko And Another vs. Anshul Jagannath 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 128 Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 128 The Allahabad High Court has recently held that the Court has suo moto powers to extend the time limit for disciplinary proceedings fixed by an earlier Court to ensure that serious misconduct does not go unpunished. Referring to the decision of the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Abhishek Prabhakar Awasthi v. New India Assurance Company Limited and Others which was affirmed by the Apex Court in U.P. through Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Lucknow v. Ram Prakash Singh, the bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Amitabh Kumar Rai held, No Indefeasible Right To Force State To Conclude Exam Process When Papers Leaked May Have Benefited Candidates: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Km. Lakshmi And 10 Others Versus State of U.P. and others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 129 Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 129 In a case of leaked paper and cancelled examination, the Allahabad High Court has held that there is no indefeasible right to force the State to conclude the examination process when papers leaked may have benefited the candidates. While dealing with cancellation of written examinations conducted by U.P. Education Service Selection Commission in which paper was leaked, Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery held “a candidate has no indefeasible right to be selected or to force the State to conclude an examination process which was tainted since papers of written examination were leaked and candidates were benefited also. It is the fairness which is the utmost object to conduct any examination and under no circumstance it can be permitted to compromise.” UP Protection Of Trees Act | Opportunity Of Hearing Mandatory Before Rejecting Permission To Cut Trees: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Bihari Lal vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 130 Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 130 The Allahabad High Court has held that under Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Protection of Trees Act, 1976, opportunity of hearing is mandatory if the competent authority seeks ...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 23 To March 29, 2026

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags