SHYAMSINGH CHAHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT - C No. - 18054 of 2026

Shyamsingh Chahar
                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                                  .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)            : Chandra Pal Singh, Satyvrat Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s)            : C.S.C.

Court No. - 40
                      HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
                      HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State-respondents.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:

     "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
     respondent no.1 (State U.P. through Principal of U.P. Secretary/Secretary
     (Co-Operative), U.P. Government at Lucknow and respondent no.4
     (District Magistrate/Collector, Agra) to decide the application/written
     complaint of the petitioner dated 17.11.2025 and 02.12.2025 within a
     stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
     ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
     the respondent no.4, District Magistrate, Agra to produce/submit the
     report of three member team/committee.
     iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
     the respondent nos. 1 and 4 to take departmental proceeding as well as
     criminal proceeding initiated against the respondent no.3 along with other
     erring employees of Co-Operative Society, District Agra and lodged the
     First Information Report against them under the relevant sections on the
     basis of written complaint moved by the petitioner before the respondent
     nos. 1 and 4."

3. The petitioner is only the complainant and not an aggrieved person.
The settled law is that a writ petition can be maintained only by a person
                                                                                             WRIC No. 18054 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    whose legal rights have been infringed. A stranger or a mere complainant,
                                    who is not directly affected, has no locus to seek such a relief.

                                    4. In Jasbhai Motibhai Desai v. Roshan Kumar, Haji Bashir Ahmed
                                    & Ors., (1976) 1 SCC 671, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a person
                                    who is not an aggrieved party cannot maintain a writ petition unless he
                                    demonstrates infringement of a legally enforceable right. The principle
                                    has been reiterated in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v. State of
                                    Maharashtra & Ors., (2013) 4 SCC 465, wherein it was held that only a
                                    person who suffers a legal injury can invoke the writ jurisdiction.

                                    5. In this regard, reference may be made to the judgment of this Court in
                                    Smt. Anita Kumari v. State of U.P. & Ors., 2021 (5) ADJ 470, wherein
                                    this Court has held that "a stranger to the proceedings, who is not affected
                                    directly or whose legal rights are not infringed, cannot maintain a writ
                                    petition merely on the basis of being a complainant."

                                    6. In the present case, the petitioner has no enforceable right to seek
                                    direction upon the respondents to initiate departmental proceeding or lodge
                                    an FIR against the respondent no.3 along with other erring employees of Co-
                                    Operative Society, District Agra as none of his rights are prejudiced.

                                    7. In view of the aforesaid legal position, the writ petition is dismissed.



                                                                   (Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
                                    May 7, 2026
                                    Kuldeep




Digitally signed by :-
KULDEEP SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad