Court examined petitioner's claim for payment regarding work done. It held that disputed questions of fact require evidence and cannot be adjudicated under Article 226. Case disposed by observing facts are for civil or criminal courts.
Observation that facts are for civil or criminal courts; writ powers not exercised.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16317 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Uday Bhan,Vijay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranjal Mehrotra
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Uday Bhan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
List is being revised, but Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondents is not present.
Vide para 11 of the counter affidavit it has been submitted that the petitioner has already been paid the money against work that he has carried out during Mela. However, we notice that there is further averment in paragraph 11 of the counter affidavit is that the petitioner had written a letter that he shall not make any demand of payment.
On a pointed query being made to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether this above statement of fact is correct or not, he submits that this statement has been recorded in the letter subsequently. All these are disputed questions of facts for which evidence is required to be led. This Court cannot enter into such scrutiny of facts in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
However, it is left open for the petitioner to agitate the matter before civil court or may institute such criminal proceeding as may be advised.
Order Date :- 5.11.2019 IrfanUddin
(Ajit Kumar,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether writ jurisdiction under Article 226 can be invoked to inquire into disputed questions of fact.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajendra Prasad Singh
State Of U P And 3 Others
Ramesh Sinha
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
