Allahabad High Court
SHAMIM AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
Writ jurisdiction is unavailable where the dispute involves a contested question of fact.
Summary
Shamim Ahmad filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and three other respondents. The petition sought relief under writ jurisdiction. The Court examined the pleadings and observed that the dispute centered on factual issues that were contested between the parties. It held that such factual disputes cannot be resolved through a writ petition, which is limited to questions of law and jurisdiction. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue a civil suit for damages or any other appropriate remedy.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition can be entertained when the matter involves a disputed question of fact.
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- factual dispute
- civil suit
- damages
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10224 of 2026
Shamim Ahmad
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shakil Ahmad
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing
Counsel for the State respondents.
2. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the
record, we are of view that the present writ petition involves the disputed
question of facts which cannot be adjudicated upon in writ jurisdiction.
3. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed with liberty granted to the
petitioner to file a suit for damages or any other civil suit as may be
advised.
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
March 18, 2026
Kuldeep
Digitally signed by :-
KULDEEP SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…