PIL concerning a civil dispute between parties; the court held writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was not appropriate and disposed of the petition, granting liberty to pursue proceedings before the civil or revenue court.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43342-DB
Court No. - 1
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 758 of 2025 Petitioner :- Premlata And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Phal,Neelam Kumari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Atau Rahman Masoodi,J.t Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The averments made in the present writ petition essentially indicate that the dispute between the parties is civil in nature.
For such a grievance, writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not lie.
Learned counsel for the petitioners is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings through Civil/revenue court. In case any such proceedings are initiated, the court concerned shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.)
Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Shahnaz
Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 lies for a dispute that is essentially civil in nature.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Premlata And 3 Others
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Attau Rahman Masoodi
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
