Allahabad High Court
HARISH KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
The petition is dismissed because a statutory alternative remedy under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 is available.
Summary
Harish Kumar filed a writ petition challenging the dismissal order dated 26‑05‑2023 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moradabad. The petitioner appealed that order to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Moradabad, but the appeal was dismissed on 11‑11‑2025 on the ground that it was time‑barred. Both parties conceded that the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy under Rule 23 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, which provides a mechanism for revision. The High Court examined whether the writ petition could be entertained despite the existence of that statutory remedy. It held that the presence of a specific statutory avenue bars the court’s jurisdiction in the writ petition. Consequently, the petition was dismissed on the ground of statutory alternative remedy.
Issues considered
- The writ petition is maintainable when a specific statutory revision remedy under Rule 23 is available.
- The appeal dismissed as time‑barred can be revisited through the statutory remedy.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 — s. Rule 23
Subjects
- statutory alternative remedy
- revision
- time-barred appeal
- police disciplinary proceedings
- high court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6733 of 2026
Harish Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Yadav, Ramesh Chandra
Dwivedi
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 dismissal dated 26.05.2023 passed by the respondent no.3-
Senior Superintendent of Police, Moradabad was challenge by the petitioner
before the appellate authority, i.e., respondent no.2-Deputy Inspector General
of Police, Moradabad, which was also dismissed on 11.11.2025 on the ground
of time barred appeal.
3. It is admitted by counsel for the parties that against the orders 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, this petition is dismissed on the ground of statutory
alternative remedy.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
May 6, 2026
Pramod Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…