MA/170/2025, Please Help and REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE DECREE‑HOLDER (MAHESH MITRA) SEEKING REVIEW, RECALL, AND SETTING ASIDE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DATED 20.06.2024 AND 02.05.2025, AND PRAYING FOR SUMMONING THE RECORDS, Request for URGENT HEARING, URGENT STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE FINAL DECREE OF THE HON’BLE NCDRC DATED 30.05.2014

[M Mittra]

All Respected Sir/Ma'am,

 
Please find the enclosed File regarding:- 1. MA/170/2025, Please Help and REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE DECREE‑HOLDER (MAHESH MITRA) SEEKING REVIEW, RECALL, AND SETTING ASIDE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DATED 20.06.2024 AND 02.05.2025, AND PRAYING FOR SUMMONING THE RECORDS, Request for URGENT HEARING, URGENT STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE FINAL DECREE OF THE HON’BLE NCDRC DATED 30.05.2014.

2. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court Judgment in the matter of Avnesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India (decided 03.06.2026 - Matters Under Article 227 No.13425 of 2025)

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court Judgment in the matter of Avnesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India (decided 03.06.2026 -  Matters Under Article 227 No.13425 of 2025), Judgment Important Paragraph No. 31 Present Under Below:-

"31. Before parting with the present matter, this Court considers it
appropriate to place on record certain observations which, in its
considered opinion, warrant the attention of the Hon’ble the Chief
Minister, Uttar Pradesh that the time has come for the State to evolve
and adopt a doctrine of ‘superior responsibility’, whereby senior officers in an administrative hierarchy are held accountable- and, in appropriate cases, criminally responsible for their failure to prevent or punish acts of commission or omission by their subordinates. The expression ‘failure to prevent’ must be understood to include ‘the failure to take timely administrative measures’ or ‘to report the matter to higher administrative authorities’. Exceptional situations that produce widespread, systematic and enduring adverse effects upon public administration demand exceptional remedies. A duty to report or act may appropriately be developed within administrative law to address systematic and prevalent under-performance, negligence, breach of service ethics and dereliction of service codes. Senior officers must be held accountable for the conduct and performance of their subordinates, as it is both their professional and administrative responsibility to ensure the effective delivery of public services. Such accountability may legitimately be extended to criminal liability where the failure to prevent or punish leads to criminal acts such as corruption, fraud, willful suppression of records, contempt of government orders and Gazette Notifications, and failure to
implement ‘State policy’, and ‘Programmes’, such as zero tolerance
towards organised, institutionalised corruption- whether corruption of
the mind, whereby the decision-making process is deliberately perverted to serve private ends under the guise of official authority, or corruption of the purse, whereby public office is converted into an instrument of personal pecuniary gain."

With profound respect and utmost humility, I, Mahesh Mitra, a citizen and decree‑holder, beg to place before Your Lordship the enclosed Detailed Representation that chronicles a 26‑year‑long ordeal of systemic judicial and administrative failure in the enforcement of a final and binding consumer decree passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on 30 May 2014 in RP/892/2011.
Despite 47+ judicial orders, directions, and punitive measures,  including a sentence of imprisonment on the erring CEO of the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) the decree has been reduced to a paper decree. The executing forums below, instead of enforcing the mandate, have rewritten the decree, accepted a fraudulent “Without Prejudice” letter as compliance, and closed execution proceedings, while I remain empty‑handed without possession, allotment number, or registered lease deed, despite having deposited approximately ₹9,04,000/- under protest.

The case exposes fraud in court through suppression of material facts and use of “Without Prejudice” communications to defeat a judicial decree.

Wilful disobedience and institutional contempt by a statutory authority Judicial overreach and per incuriam orders by the District and State Consumer Commissions, which inserted the word “between” into the NCDRC decree to grant the judgment‑debtor a discretion the decree never conferred;

A complete breakdown of the execution machinery, leaving the common citizen to run from pillar to post for a quarter of a century.
The detailed representation, prepared with reference to all relevant documents, legal principles, and the preponderance of probabilities, demonstrates beyond any doubt that the orders' closing execution suffers from patent errors on the face of the record and that the Respondent’s conduct constitutes criminal breach of trust, contempt of court, and a grave affront to the rule of law.
I most humbly beseech Your Lordship to kindly direct the listing of the enclosed representation before an appropriate Bench of this Hon’ble Court, or to pass such other orders as may be deemed fit, so that complete justice, which is the constitutional promise of this Court under Article 142, may finally be done to a citizen who has lost everything but his faith in the judiciary.
The petitioner requests the Hon'ble State Consumer Commission/Hon'ble Court for an urgent hearing in the matter, summoning the judicial and administrative files of the matter and the respondent before the Hon'ble State Consumer Commission/Hon'ble Court through physical or video conferencing, for the statement of the respondent, and for obtaining a compliance affidavit from the respondent. It is requested to kindly accept the prayer of the petitioner and issue orders and directions.
I am also marking this communication to the Secretary General and the Registrar (Judicial) of this Hon’ble Court for necessary administrative action.

Officials and others who obstruct the course of justice should be viewed and treated as abettors.
Enclosure:- Detailed Written Representation / Petition with Chronology, Legal Submissions, Prayers, and Judgment of Allahabad High Court - (The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court Judgment in the matter of Avnesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India - decided 03.06.2026 -  Matters Under Article 227 No.13425 of 2025),  .
Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done; in the present matter, the petitioner has been facing continuous injustice, oppression, and acts of terror at both judicial and administrative levels for years, wrongs that are clearly evident. Consequently, the petitioner is seeking immediate, impartial, and transparent proceedings and is appealing to various courts for redress. 

Please issue appropriate directions should any documents, evidence, or affidavits be required from the petitioner regarding this matter. 

The petitioner is also ready and willing to appear in person in connection with this case.

Thanking Your Lordship for your kind consideration and patience.
With the deepest reverence,
Thanks & Regards,
Mahesh Mitra
Decree Holder/Petitioner in Person
E 86 Swami Dayanand Colony, Delhi - 110007, Ph - 8800298757

Date-07.06.2026