This writ petition challenged an authority's involvement in an ongoing civil dispute. The bench held that interference via mandamus at this stage is not warranted, mandating the follow of established legal procedures instead.
No costs.
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. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1261 of 2020 Petitioner :- Girjanand Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari,Kripa Shankar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
It is reflected from the record that the petitioner has civil dispute with private parties and the litigation is underway. We are not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage by issuing any mandamus to respondent authority. Needless to say that the procedure established by law shall be followed.
The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
Order Date :- 20.1.2020 rk
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in an ongoing civil dispute between the petitioner and private parties by issuing a writ of mandamus.
Girjanand Mishra
State Of U.P.
Bharati Sapru
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
