Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RAMASHREYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

A writ petition is not maintainable where the dispute is solely with a private individual.

Summary

Petitioner Ramashrey filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents, including a private individual (respondent No.5). The State's standing counsel raised a preliminary objection that the petition was not maintainable because the grievance was against a private individual rather than a public authority. The Court examined the objection and held that it could not interfere in a matter where the dispute is with a private party. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, with the Court directing the petitioner to seek the appropriate remedy under the law. No substantive merits of the petition were considered.

Issues considered

  • What is the maintainability of a writ petition when the dispute is against a private individual rather than a public authority?

Subjects

  • writ jurisdiction
  • maintainability
  • private individual
  • civil remedy
  • high court

Judgment

                                                  HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                             WRIT - C No. - 17753 of 2026

                                    Ramashrey
                                                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                         Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 4 Others
                                                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Akshay Kumar Shukla, Ravindra Pal
                                                                       Singh Kashyap
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)        : C.S.C., Sher Bahadur Singh

                                    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 individual i.e. respondent No. 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.