Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ABHAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed because a statutory alternative remedy under Rule 23 is available to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Abhay Kumar Singh, challenged the order of punishment affirmed in an appeal before the High Court of Allahabad. The respondents, the State of U.P. and others, contended that the petitioner had a statutory alternative remedy under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991. The court considered the preliminary objection raised by the respondents that a revision petition could be filed under the said rule. Finding that the statutory remedy was indeed available, the court held that the writ petition could not proceed. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is barred from filing a writ petition when a statutory alternative remedy under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 is available

Subjects

  • statutory alternative remedy
  • writ petition
  • revision
  • Rule 23
  • U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991

Judgment

                                                  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                                WRIT - A No. - 6644 of 2026

                                    Abhay Kumar Singh
                                                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                          Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)                      :    Deo Prakash Singh
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)                      :    C.S.C.

                                    Court No. - 6
                                                             HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

                                    1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the
                                    respondents.

                                    2. The order of punishment affirmed in the appeal are under challenge in the
                                    present writ petition.

                                    3. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing Counsel that
                                    against the order impugned statutory alternative remedy is available to the
                                    petitioner to file revision as provided under Rule 23 of U.P. Police Officials of
                                    the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal), Rule, 1991.

                                    4. In view of the above, writ petition is dismissed on the ground of availability
                                    of statutory alternative remedy.



                                                                                                (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    May 5, 2026
                                    Pramod Tripathi




Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.