Allahabad High Court
ANKURAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
A writ petition is not maintainable where the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order.
Summary
The petitioner, Ankuram Yadav, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a certiorari to quash an order dated 12-12-2024 issued by the Director (Ayurvedic Service) of Uttar Pradesh, which withheld two annual increments of his salary. The petitioner alleged that the order was illegal and sought relief from the High Court. The State's standing counsel raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner had an alternative remedy in the form of an appeal against the order. The Court held that because an alternative remedy was available, the writ petition could not be entertained. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, with liberty granted to the petitioner to pursue the appeal as per law.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when an aggrieved party has an alternative statutory appeal against an administrative order?
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- certiorari
- alternative remedy
- administrative order
- public service increment
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14832 of 2026
Ankuram Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for
State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present petition has been filed with the following prayer:
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the
impugned order dated 12.12.2024 passed by Respondent no.1/Director
(Ayurvedic Service) of U.P. at Lucknow whereby the punishment of
withholding of two annual increment of the petitioner."
3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the
petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing appeal against the order
impugned.
4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to
entertain the instant petition.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
avail the remedy as available to him under law.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
September 23, 2026
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…