Allahabad High Court
MOHD. ALAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the dispute involves a contested question of fact and must be decided by a civil suit, thus dismissing the writ petition.
Summary
Petitioner Mohd. Alam filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing authorities to protect his peaceful possession of a property and to act against the Gram Pradhan for alleged illegal interference. The Court examined whether it could entertain the petition, noting that the alleged interference is a disputed question of fact. It held that such factual disputes between private parties are for a competent civil court, not the High Court in writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the Court declined to grant the reliefs sought. The petition was dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to file a civil suit.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition for mandamus to protect peaceful possession when the matter involves a disputed question of fact.
- Whether the Court can direct action against a Gram Pradhan for alleged abuse of public office in a private property dispute.
Subjects
- Writ jurisdiction
- Mandamus
- Peaceful possession
- Private dispute
- Civil suit
- Question of fact
- Public officer interference
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 5214 of 2026
Mohd. Alam
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Astitva Srivastava, Pankaj Kumar
Srivastava
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 the learned Standing
Counsel for the State.
2. Petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the
following reliefs:
"1. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing
the concerned authorities to ensure protection of the petitioner's peaceful
possession over the property in question.
2. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the
respondent authorities to take immediate and effective action against
Respondent No.5, the Gram Pradhan, for her illegal interference, abuse of
public office and unlawful acts."
3. The question as to whether the respondent No.5 is interfering with the
peaceful possession over the property in question of the petitioner is a
disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court
in writ jurisdiction, as the said issue can be decided by a competent court
of law on the basis of pleadings and evidence on record.
4. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the relief as prayed
for in the writ petition. However, it is open to the petitioner to seek
remedy of filing a civil suit under civil law as the dispute is between two
private persons.
5. The writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid liberty.
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
May 6, 2026
Kuldeep
Digitally signed by :-
KULDEEP SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…