Allahabad High Court
SANJAY SINGH @ SANJAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
Writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for execution or enforcement of revenue court orders where an alternative statutory remedy under Section 460 of the U.P. Revenue Code is available.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Singh, filed a writ petition seeking the High Court to enforce an order dated 16‑10‑2021 passed by the Tehsildar (Judicial) in a revenue suit under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code. He claimed to be an inhabitant of the village concerned and asked the Court to compel compliance against respondent No. 7. The respondents raised a preliminary objection that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot ordinarily be invoked for execution or enforcement of orders of revenue courts, especially when a specific statutory remedy under Section 460 of the U.P. Revenue Code, Manual 2016, is available. Citing the precedent of Manbhavati v. State of U.P. (2020 AWC 789), the Court held that the existence of an efficacious alternative remedy bars interference by a writ. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the petition and disposed of it, directing the petitioner to pursue the remedy under Section 460. The petition was therefore dismissed without any substantive relief.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under Article 226 can be entertained for execution or enforcement of an order passed by a revenue court.
- Whether the availability of a specific statutory remedy under Section 460 of the U.P. Revenue Code precludes the exercise of writ jurisdiction.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
- U.P. Revenue Code Manual, 2016 — s. 460
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- revenue court order
- Section 460
- alternative statutory remedy
- High Court of Allahabad
- Article 226
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 37554 of 2025
Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 8 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Kumar Srivastava,
Atul Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ankush Tandon, C.S.C.,
Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking
compliance of the order dated 16.10.2021 passed by respondent
No. 4, Tehsildar (Judicial), Sadar, Azamgarh in Suit No. 308,
Computerized Suit No. T20171567012002 (Report vs. Rajesh
Singh) under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against
respondent No. 7.
3. The petitioner claims himself to be an inhabitant of the said
village.
4. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection
that, in view of the law laid down by this Court, including in
Manbhavati vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2020 1
AWC 789 A writ jurisdiction cannot ordinarily be invoked for
execution or enforcement of orders passed by revenue courts. It is
further submitted that the petitioner has an efficacious statutory
remedy available under Section 460 of the U.P. Revenue Code,
Manual, 2016 for execution/enforcement of the order in question.
5. In view of the availability of an alternative statutory remedy, I
am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
WRIC No. 37554 of 2025
2
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to avail such remedy as may be available to him under
law.
May 12, 2026
Sumaira
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SUMAIRA AQUIL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…