Allahabad High Court
HARI NARAYANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The writ petition was not entertained because the impugned order was revisable, and the petitioner was granted liberty to pursue the alternative remedy available under law.
Summary
The petitioner, Hari Narayan, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 10.03.2026 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh, in Appeal No.805 of 2025 (Computerized Case No. C202515000000805) titled Lalji v. Rahul and others under Section 38(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection that the impugned order was revisable. The High Court accepted this objection and stated it was not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy available under law. The office was directed to return the certified copies of the documents annexed with the petition to the petitioner's counsel after retaining photocopies on record.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the impugned order is revisable under law?
- Whether the High Court should exercise its writ jurisdiction to interfere with the order passed by the Additional Commissioner (Judicial) under Section 38(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006?
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 38(4)
Subjects
- Writ jurisdiction
- Alternative remedy
- Revisional remedy
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006
- Section 38(4)
- Certiorari
- Revenue law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 15426 of 2026
Hari Narayan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gyanendra Prakash Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. This petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"I. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
order impugned dated 10.03.2026 passed by the Additional Commissioner
(Judicial) Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh (Respondent No.2) in Appeal
No.805 of 2025 Computerized Case No. C202515000000805 Lalji Vs.
Rahul and others u/s 38 (4) U.P. Revenue Code, 2006."
2. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing Counsel
that the order impugned is revisable.
3. In view of above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under the law.
5. Office is directed to return the certified copies of the documents
annexed with the petition to learned counsel for the petitioner after
retaining photocopy of the same on record.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
April 23, 2026
Nitika Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…