Allahabad High Court
MOHAMMAD ASIFversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
Mandamus cannot be issued against private individuals; the petitioner must seek relief under common law.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohammad Asif, was appointed as a peon through an outsourcing arrangement by M/s Prime Cleaning Services, a private entity. He claimed he was not allowed to work from 16 September 2025 without any notice and wrote to the Presiding Officer of Industrial Tribunal-3, which led to an order on 25 February 2026. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking mandamus to compel the private respondent to allow him to work. The Court examined the record and noted that the appointment was made by a private respondent, and established that mandamus cannot be issued against private individuals. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to pursue the appropriate common law remedy.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when a private entity fails to honor an outsourced appointment and can a writ of mandamus be issued against a private respondent?
Subjects
- outsourcing
- mandamus
- private respondent
- employment
- writ petition
- common law remedy
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 7288 of 2026
Mohammad Asif
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Diwakar Mishra, Rajeev Kumar
Shukla, Vinod Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
1. Petitioner was given appointment on the post of peon by way of
outsourcing vide letter dated 04.10.2024 issued by the Respondent No.5.
2. It is argued that the petitioner was not permitted to work without any
notice from 16.09.2025, hence a letter has been written by him to the
Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal-3, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur on
16.02.2026 which was decided by the Administrative Officer, Industrial
Tribunal vide order dated 25.02.2026, hence the present writ petition.
3. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. From perusal of record, it is clear that petitioner was given appointment
by the private-respondent namely Respondent No.5 namely M/s Prime
Cleaning Services, Govinda Bhawan, 2nd Floor, 25, Nawal Kishore Road,
Hazratganj, Lucknow who is a private person. Law in this connection is
well settled that mandamus cannot be issued against the private
individuals and the appropriate remedy lies under the common law.
5. In this view of the matter, the present petition is dismissed with the
liberty to avail the common law remedy, if so advised.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
May 14, 2026
Swati
Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…