The single-judge bench declined interference under Article 226 as the petitioner had an available statutory appeal remedy and failed to avail it for five years due to laches, resulting in the dismissal of the writ petition.
Writ petition dismissed.
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. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9954 of 2022
Petitioner :- Dev Narayan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Against the order dated 03.7.2017, the petitioner has remedy of statutory appeal. That remedy has not been availed for almost five years.
Both on account of statutory remedy of appeal available and laches noted above, the interference claimed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is declined.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed .
Order Date :- 11.4.2022 Faraz
Digitally signed by FARAZ AHMAD Date: 2022.04.12 11:29:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 given the availability of statutory appeal and laches.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dev Narayan
State Of U.P.
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
