Allahabad High Court
SUDARSHAN LAL SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
A writ petition is not maintainable where the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available.
Summary
The petitioner, Sudarshan Lal Sharma, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a certiorari to quash an order dated 20 January 2026 passed by the respondent under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 in the case Gaon Sabha vs. Sudarshan Lal. The order had been issued in a revenue matter (Case No. 11451/2024). The respondent's standing counsel raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner possessed an alternative remedy in the form of an appeal and a restoration application against the impugned order. The learned judge agreed that because an alternative statutory remedy was available, the writ petition could not be entertained. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, with liberty granted to the petitioner to pursue the appropriate appeal or restoration application. No substantive merits of the revenue order were examined.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition seeking certiorari can be entertained when the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal and restoration application under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- alternative remedy
- U.P. Revenue Code
- Section 67
- High Court of Allahabad
- jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17967 of 2026
Sudarshan Lal Sharma
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vishnu Kumar
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
State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present petition has been filed with the following prayer:
"issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the
order dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure No.1 to this writ petition) passed by
the respondent no.3 U/s 67 U.P. Revenue Code 2006 in Case
No.11451/2024 (Computerised No. T202403410211451) (Gaon Sabha Vs.
Sudarshan Lal),."
3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the
petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing appeal as well as restoration
application against the order impugned.
4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to
entertain the instant petition.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
avail the remedy as available to him under law.
6. Certified copy of the orders, if any, be returned to learned counsel for the
petitioner after retaining photo copy of the same.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
May 7, 2026
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…