Allahabad High Court
RAJUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner must first avail the specific statutory remedy under Rule 59 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
Summary
Petitioner Raju filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and others to cancel a fisheries lease on public utility land (Pokhari) of Araji No.780 (0.5260 hectare) and to restrain any interference by respondents. The respondents, through standing counsel, raised a preliminary objection that the petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had a specific statutory remedy under Rule 59 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 to appeal the lease grant. The Court examined the objection and concluded that it was not inclined to interfere with the statutory remedy available. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, with liberty granted to the petitioner to pursue the remedy under the law. Certified copies of the petition documents were ordered to be returned to the petitioner’s counsel.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under the Constitution can be entertained to challenge a fisheries lease granted on public utility land.
- Whether the existence of a specific statutory remedy under Rule 59 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 bars the jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain the writ petition.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 59
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- lease cancellation
- public utility land
- U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016
- preliminary objection
- jurisdiction
- petition disposed
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 38760 of 2025
Raju
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Achche Lal Singh Yadav, Awadhesh
Kumar Malviya
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. This petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"(a) To, issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondents to cancel the fisheries lease upon public utility land (Pokhari) of Araji
No.780 comprising area 0.5260 hectare and restrain the respondents not to Interfere
to use the pokhari by villagers in any manner."
2. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing Counsel
that by means of present writ petition, petitioner wants to challenge the
fishery lease granted to respondent No. 5. It has been further submitted
that petitioner has remedy of filing an appeal under Rule 59 of the U.P.
Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
3. In view of above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under the law.
5. Office is directed to return the certified copies of the documents
annexed with the petition to learned counsel for the petitioner after
retaining photocopy of the same on record.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
May 14, 2026
Nitika Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…