Allahabad High Court
SHIV VEER SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the appropriate remedy is a revision under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials Rules, 1991.
Summary
Shiv Veer Singh, a Sub Inspector, filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging orders dated 04‑08‑2025 and 09‑01‑2026 issued by senior police officials, as well as an inquiry report dated 05‑06‑2025, seeking certiorari to quash them and mandamus to prevent interference with his duties. The respondents, the State of Uttar Pradesh and five police officials, opposed the petition. The court held that a specific statutory remedy under Rule 23 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, is available for such grievances. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as premature, and the petitioner was directed to file a revision before the appropriate revisional authority within three weeks. The court also clarified that the revisional authority cannot dismiss the revision on the ground of laches.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable when a specific statutory revision remedy under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, is available.
- Whether the orders dated 04‑08‑2025, 09‑01‑2026 and the inquiry report dated 05‑06‑2025 can be challenged by a writ of certiorari or mandamus.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 — s. Rule 23
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- revision
- Rule 23
- U.P. Police Rules
- administrative law
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 7112 of 2026
Shiv Veer Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Singh Yadav, Saroj Kumar Yadav
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-State.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with
the following prayers :-
"i. Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of the certiorari, thereby
quashing the order dated 04.08.2025 passed by Respondent No.5 i.e. Deputy
Commissioner of Police, Central NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar, along with the
order dated 09.01.2026 passed by Respondent No.4 i.e. Additional
Commissioner of Police (Headquarter) Gautam Budh Nagar, as well as
enquiry report dated 05.06.2025 submitted by Respondent No.6 i.e. Inquiry
Officer/Assistant Commissioner of Police-I, Central NOIDA, Gautam Budh
Nagar (contained as Annexure No.1, 2 & 3 to this writ petition).
ii. Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of the mandamus, directing the
respondents to not to interfere in peaceful functioning of the petitioner, as Sub
Inspector Sector 63, NOIDA Commissionerate, Gautam Budh Nagar."
3. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing
Counsel that against the order impugned 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 permitting the
WRIA No. 7112 of 2026
2
petitioner to file revision before the revisional authority as provided
under Rule 23 of the Rules, 1991 within a period of three weeks from
today. If such a revision is filed within stipulated period, the revisional
authority shall decide the same within a period of three months
thereafter.
5. It is made clear that the revisional authority will not dismiss the
revision only on the ground of laches.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
May 12, 2026
Pramod Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
PRAKASH PADIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…