Allahabad High Court
SUNIL KUMARversusMANAGING DIRECTOR AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable and should be disposed of, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Sunil Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to provide him alternate employment on similar terms and to decide a pending application dated 14.08.2026. The respondents argued that the grievance regarding work allocation should be addressed by the Regional Manager and did not oppose a direction for speedy disposal of the fresh representation. The Court found that keeping the petition pending would serve no useful purpose and chose to dispose of it without addressing the merits. It directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Regional Manager within three weeks, accompanied by a certified copy of the order and the petition. The Regional Manager was instructed to decide the representation within three months, provided there are no legal impediments. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the respondents to provide alternate employment to the petitioner.
- Whether the Court can direct the expeditious disposal of the petitioner’s pending application/representation.
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable in the present form.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- alternate employment
- administrative grievance
- fresh representation
- High Court
- disposal
- procedural direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14084 of 2026
Sunil Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Managing Director And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Birendra Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Mrigraj Singh
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS
commanding and directing to the respondent authorities to provide the
petitioner an alternate employment in similar terms,
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS
commanding and directing to the respondent authorities to decide the
application/representation dated 14.08.2026 of the petitioner which is
pending before him. (Annexure No.5 to this writ petition) ."
3. Mr. Mrigraj Singh, learned counsel for contesting respondents no. 1 to 3
has contended that the grievance of the petitioner regarding allocation of
work according to his physical condition can be more appropriately
redressed by the Regional Manager (respondent no.2), and that he has no
objection if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the fresh
representation, to be moved by the present petitioner, within such stipulated
period, as may be directed by this Court.
4. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by
keeping this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation
on the merits of the case, with liberty to the present petitioner to move a
fresh representation before the Regional Manager (respondent no. 2) to
ventilate his grievances, as raised in this petition, within a period of three
weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order and a self
WRIA No. 14084 of 2026
2
attested copy of the instant writ petition, who, in turn, shall consider and
decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a
period of three months from the date of production of the same, if there is
no any other legal impediment.
5. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition stands disposed of.
September 9, 2026
VS
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR BARATAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…