Allahabad High Court
GENERAL MANAGER, BISALPUR KISAN COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS, LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable at the first instance and is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, General Manager of Bisalpur Kisan Cooperative Sugar Mills, filed a writ petition challenging an order that required payment of Rs. 2,38,000. The respondents, the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others, contended that the petition was not maintainable because an alternative statutory remedy existed. The petitioner did not deny the existence of the alternative remedy but argued that the writ petition could be filed at the first instance. The Court held that the presence of an alternative statutory remedy precludes the filing of a writ petition at the first instance and that the appellate authority has the power to consider all issues on facts and law. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the Court directing the petitioner to file an appeal within three weeks and stating that any interim relief application filed with the appeal would be considered expeditiously.
Issues considered
- The writ petition's maintainability at the first instance in view of an alternative statutory remedy
- Whether the appellate authority can consider all issues on facts and law
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- maintainability
- alternative remedy
- statutory remedy
- appellate authority
- interim relief
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 38664 of 2026
General Manager, Bisalpur Kisan Cooperative
Sugar Mills, Limited .....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashutosh Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Brij Raj Verma, C.S.C., Kuldeep Johri
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Brij
Raj Verma, learned counsel for respondents.
2. At the outset, Court considers preliminary objection by learned counsel
for respondents regarding maintainability of this writ petition since there
is an alternative remedy.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner has not denied about alternative remedy
and that there are grounds to file present writ petition at first instance,
however, Court does not find any ground to entertain this writ petition at
first instance. An argument that if an appeal is filed against impugned
order, the petitioner has to pay entire demand of about Rs. 2,38,000/-
cannot be accepted since it is a statutory remedy.
4. Otherwise also, declaration made in paragraph 16 of writ petition is not
correct and that the Appellate Authority has power to consider all issues
on facts and law.
5. In view of above, this writ petition at first instance is not maintainable,
however, this order will not come in the way if petitioner files an appeal
and in case an appeal is filed within 3 weeks from today, concerned
WRIC No. 38664 of 2026
2
Authority will consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance
with law.
6. So far as prayer for interim relief is concerned, if any application is
filed along with the appeal, the same will be considered in accordance
with law expeditiously preferably within six weeks from the date of filing
said application.
7. With aforesaid observations, this writ petition is disposed of.
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
September 24, 2026
AK
Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…