Iti Ltd. Mankapur Thru. Unit Head/Agm Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

Iti Ltd. Mankapur Thru. Unit Head/Agm Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed as not pressed with permission/liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; certified copies and photocopies filed with the petition to be kept on record and returned to the petitioner's counsel.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the Labour Court order was maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, or whether such a challenge lay only under Article 227 (preliminary objection raised by respondent-side counsel).

Ratio / Principle

On the petitioner's counsel stating that he did not wish to press the writ petition and seeking permission to file a fresh writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the Court granted that permission and dismissed the writ petition as not pressed (याचिका बल न दिये जाने के आधार पर निरस्त).

Key takeaways

The certified copies and photocopies filed along with the writ petition were directed to be retained on record and returned to the petitioner's counsel.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 17 — WRIT-C No. 9846 of 2025, decided 14.10.2025 (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.). ITI Ltd, Mankapur filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P. Faizabad. Respondent-side counsel raised a preliminary objection that a challenge to a Labour Court order is not maintainable under Article 226 but under Article 227. In response, the petitioner's counsel stated he did not wish to press the petition and sought liberty to file a fresh writ petition under Article 227. The Court, granting the said permission, dismissed the writ petition as not pressed, and directed that the certified copies/photocopies filed with the petition be kept on record and returned to the petitioner's counsel. The maintainability question under Articles 226/227 was thus not decided on merits.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT - C No. - 9846 of 2025

Iti Ltd Mankapur Thru. Unit Head/Agm

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Presiding Officer Labour Court U.P. Faizabad And 20 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dwijendra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ajay Pratap Singh, Pankaj Kumar Singh

Court No. - 17

HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री िद्वजेन्द्र िमश्रा, िवद्वान अपर मुख्य स्थायी अिधवक्ता श्री पंकज श्रीवास्तव तथा िवपक्षी संख्या 2, 3, 6-10, 12 एवं 19 के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री अजय प्रताप िसह तथा िवपक्षी संख्या 16 के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री पंकज कुमार को सुना तथा पत्रावली का अवलोकन िकया।

िवद्वान अिधवक्ता श्री अजय प्रताप िसह ने प्रारंिभक आपित्त करते हुए कथन िकया िक श्रम न्यायालय के आदेश के िवरुद्ध भारतीय संिवधान के अनुच्छेद 226 के अंतगर्त िरट यािचका पोषणीय नहीं होगी तथा यह यािचका भारतीय संिवधान के अनुच्छेद 227 के अंतगर्त पोषणीय होगी।

उक्त आपित्त के उत्तर में यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता ने कहा िक वह यािचका पर बल नहीं देना चाहते हैं तथा वह अनुच्छेद 227 के अंतगर्त एक नवीन यािचका प्रस्तुत करने की अनुमित चाहते हैं।

तद्नुसार, उपरोक्त अनुमित के साथ यािचका बल न िदये जाने के आधार पर िनरस्त की जाती है।

यािचका के साथ प्रस्तुत प्रमािणत प्रितयां, छायाप्रितयां अिभलेख पर रखते हुए यािचकाकतार् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता को वापस कर दी जायें।

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

October 14, 2025

Ankit

Digitally signed by :- ANKIT SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench