The High Court held that it lacks jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition seeking relief against a private company under Article 226, dismissing the petition and directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum.
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. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40947 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganesh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following relief:
"i. To, issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned demand notice dated 07.03.2019 issued by respondent no. 4 against the petitioner of Rs. 82039.44."
A perusal of record shows that the petitioner is seeking a direction against the respondent no. 4, which is a private company.
Since the petitioner, in substance, is seeking relief against the private entity, it cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
However, it is open for the petitioner to take appropriate proceedings for redressal of his grievance before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
With the above observation, the writ petition stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.12.2019
vinay
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can exercise powers under Article 226 to issue relief against a private company.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raj Kumar
State Of U P
3 Others
Shashi Kant Gupta
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
