Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

HAPPU KHAversusSTATE OF UP AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The writ petition is not maintainable because the grievance is against private individuals, not the State.

Summary

Petitioner Happu Kha filed a writ petition (Writ‑C No. 17694 of 2026) challenging actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and four other respondents. The State's standing counsel raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner’s grievance was against private individuals (respondents 4 and 5) and therefore the writ petition was not maintainable. The Hon'ble Justice Manish Kumar Nigam examined the objection and concluded that the court should not interfere in a matter that does not fall within its writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, but the petitioner was given liberty to pursue any other legal remedy available under law. The order was dated 6 May 2026.

Issues considered

  • The maintainability of a writ petition when the dispute is primarily with private individuals rather than the State.

Subjects

  • writ jurisdiction
  • maintainability
  • private individuals
  • preliminary objection
  • High Court of Allahabad

Judgment

                                                  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                             WRIT - C No. - 17694 of 2026

                                    Happu Kha
                                                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                         Versus

                                    State Of Up And 4 Others
                                                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)                :    Mohd Mohiuddin Siddiqui
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)                :    C.S.C.

                                    Court No. - 36
                                                      HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

                                    1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the
                                    State and perused the record.

                                    2. Learned Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection that dispute of
                                    the petitioner is with private individuals i.e. respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and
                                    such a writ petition is not maintainable.

                                    3. In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.

                                    4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
                                    avail the remedy as available to him under law.



                                                                                       (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    Nitika Sri.




Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.