The High Court in this single-judge brief order dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, holding that it was filed exclusively against a private respondent.
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. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 33589 of 2019
Petitioner :- Kundan Lal Sonkar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Navneet Kumar Mishra,Arvind Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.1.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the quashing of the demand notice issued by the respondent No.2.
The relief claimed in the petition is directed only against the respondent No.2.
Respondent No.2 is a private person and the writ petition against a private person is not maintainable.
In view of above, the petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
Order Date :- 22.10.2019 piyush
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition filed against a private person is maintainable.
Kundan Lal Sonkar
State Of U.P.
Another Respondent
Pankaj Mithal
Vivek Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
