Allahabad High Court
YASHODA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The writ petition is barred because the petitioner has a statutory right to appeal the impugned order, and therefore the Court will not interfere.
Summary
The petitioner, Yashoda Devi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a certiorari to quash an order dated 24.03.2026 passed by the Naib-Tehsildar in a revenue case and also sought a mandamus directing the respondents not to disturb her peaceful possession. The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order, and therefore the writ petition was not maintainable. The Court examined the objection and held that the existence of an appeal remedy barred the writ petition. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to pursue the appeal as provided by law. The petition was disposed of without any further orders.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for a party aggrieved by an order of the Naib-Tehsildar under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006?
- Does the existence of a statutory appeal remedy preclude the filing of a writ petition under Article 226?
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 34
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- preliminary objection
- appeal as alternative remedy
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Article 226
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17718 of 2026
Yashoda Devi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking following relief :-
"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order
dated 24.03.2026 passed by the Naib-Tehsildar, Rampur Karkhana, Tehsil and District
Deoria in case No. 16400 of 2024, computerized Case No. T202405590116400 (Shikha
Yadav Vs. Goldi Singh) under section 34 of U.P. R.C., 2006, containing in (Annexure No. 1
to this writ petition).
Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus respondents commanding and
directing the not to disturb the peaceful possession of the present petitioner.."
3. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing Counsel that
against the order impugned, petitioner has remedy of filing an appeal and,
therefore, the present writ petition may not be entertained.
4. In view of the same, I am not inclined to interfere with the matter.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to avail the remedy, as available to him, under the law.
6. Certified copy of the orders, if any, be returned to learned counsel for the
petitioners after retaining xerox copy of the same on record.
May 14, 2026
Rishabh
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RISHABH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…