The Court held that a writ of mandamus against a private respondent is not maintainable before this court. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed with no costs awarded to the parties.
The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to pursue the pending litigation. 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. - 1427 of 2020 Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Paras Nath Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
From the records, it reflects that the petitioner is litigating with the respondents no. 3, which is a private party and the matter has reached this court.
Now the petitioner seeks writ of mandamus against the private respondent, which is not maintainable before this court. As such this court is not inclined to interfere in this matter. It is however open to the petitioner to pursue litigation, which is pending.
The writ petition is dismissed as above. No costs.
Order Date :- 20.1.2020 rk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this court has jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition under writ of mandamus against a private respondent.
Whether the court should interfere in a matter where the writ is against a private party.
Radhey Shyam
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Bharati Sapru
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
