Madarsa Jamiya Sumaiyya vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 2882 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Madarsa Jamiya Sumaiyya vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 9 April, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                                                   2026:UHC:2556
             Office Notes, reports,
             orders or proceedings
SL.
      Date     or directions and                    COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             Registrar's order with
                  Signatures

                                      WPMS No.884 of 2026
                                      Madarsa Jamiya Sumaiyya
                                                                                 --Petitioner
                                                           Versus
                                      State of Uttarakhand and Others
                                                                                 --Respondents
                                      Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Faizan Ali, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for petitioner.

2. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel with Ms. Swati Verma, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondents.

3. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby, petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus to permanently unseal the premises of the petitioner-Madarsa Jamiya Sumaiyya situated at village Mirzapur Mustafabad, Paragna and Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar, on his giving an undertaking to the respondent-Authority that in future petitioner will not operate Madarsa in-question without due recognition by State under the rules and regulations.

4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his case is covered by the judgment and order of the Co- ordinate Bench dated 26.08.2025 in WPMS No.835 of 2025 Madarsa Inamul Ulum Society Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, and batch of writ petitions. 2026:UHC:2556

5. Learned State Counsel does not dispute the contention made by learned counsel for petitioner that the matter is covered by the aforesaid judgment.

6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of in light of the aforesaid judgment and order.

7. Pending application also stands disposed of.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 09.04.2026 PN