Allahabad High Court
JAMUNA PRASAD AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable as it concerns a private dispute, and therefore it is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing certain respondents to protect their land (Gata No. 33) in Kaushambi district and to stop illegal construction by other respondents. The court observed that the dispute was essentially between private parties and not a matter of public law. The standing counsel for the State raised a preliminary objection that such a private dispute is not maintainable as a writ petition. The judge declined to interfere, holding that the High Court cannot entertain a writ petition in a purely private dispute. Consequently, the petition was disposed, with liberty to the petitioners to pursue relief under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when the dispute is between private parties
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus against private respondents in a private land dispute
Legislation cited
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- private dispute
- maintainability
- land dispute
- U.P. Revenue Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 14683 of 2026
Jamuna Prasad And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Giri, Surendra Kumar,
Vinda Giri
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for
the State and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for following relief:
"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the
respondent No. 2 and 3 to ensure the Safety of land of the petitioners
Gata No. 33 situated at Village Baraulaha, Tehsil Chayal, Police Station
Charwa, District- Kaushambi and stop the illegal construction raising by
the respondent No. 4 to 6."
3. From the perusal of the averment made in the writ petition as well as
prayer, it is apparent that the dispute of the petitioner is with private
persons/respondents.
4. Learned Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection that such a writ
petition is not maintainable for a private dispute.
5. In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to
seek relief as available to them under provisions of U.P. Revenue Code,
2006.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
April 20, 2026
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…