Shiv Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shiv Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to file revision before the revisional authority under Rule 23 of the Rules, 1991 within three weeks; the revisional authority to decide such revision within three months thereafter and not to dismiss it only on the ground of laches.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the order dated 04.08.2025, the order dated 09.01.2026 and the enquiry report dated 05.06.2025 is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of revision under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 is available to the petitioner.

Court's answer

On the preliminary objection that an alternative remedy of revision under Rule 23 of the 1991 Rules is available, the writ petition is dismissed, permitting the petitioner to pursue the statutory revision.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is permitted to file revision before the revisional authority as provided under Rule 23 of the Rules, 1991 within a period of three weeks from the date of the order.

Key takeaways

If the revision is filed within the stipulated period of three weeks, the revisional authority shall decide it within a period of three months thereafter.ratio¶16
The revisional authority will not dismiss the revision only on the ground of laches.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - A No. 7112 of 2026 (Allahabad High Court, Prakash Padia, J., decision dated May 12, 2026): The petitioner, a Sub Inspector posted at Sector 63, NOIDA Commissionerate, Gautam Budh Nagar, sought certiorari to quash the order dated 04.08.2025 of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central NOIDA, the order dated 09.01.2026 of the Additional Commissioner of Police (Headquarter), Gautam Budh Nagar, and the enquiry report dated 05.06.2025 of the Inquiry Officer/Assistant Commissioner of Police-I, together with a mandamus restraining interference with his functioning. On the Standing Counsel's preliminary objection that an alternative remedy of revision lies under Rule 23 of the U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, the Court dismissed the petition, granting liberty to file revision within three weeks, directing the revisional authority to decide it within three months thereafter, and clarifying that the revision shall not be dismissed only on the ground of laches.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 7112 of 2026

Shiv Veer Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ajay Singh Yadav, Saroj Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

Court No. - 6

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-State.

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers :-

"i. Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of the certiorari, thereby quashing the order dated 04.08.2025 passed by Respondent No.5 i.e. Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar, along with the order dated 09.01.2026 passed by Respondent No.4 i.e. Additional Commissioner of Police (Headquarter) Gautam Budh Nagar, as well as enquiry report dated 05.06.2025 submitted by Respondent No.6 i.e. Inquiry Officer/Assistant Commissioner of Police-I, Central NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar (contained as Annexure No.1, 2 & 3 to this writ petition).

ii. Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of the mandamus, directing the respondents to not to interfere in peaceful functioning of the petitioner, as Sub Inspector Sector 63, NOIDA Commissionerate, Gautam Budh Nagar."

A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing Counsel that against the order impugned remedy is available to the petitioner to file revision as provided under Rule 23 of U.P. Police Officials of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal), Rule, 1991.

In view of the above, this petition is dismissed permitting the

WRIA No. 7112 of 2026

2

petitioner to file revision before the revisional authority as provided under Rule 23 of the Rules, 1991 within a period of three weeks from today. If such a revision is filed within stipulated period, the revisional authority shall decide the same within a period of three months thereafter.

It is made clear that the revisional authority will not dismiss the revision only on the ground of laches.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

May 12, 2026 Pramod Tripathi

Digitally signed by :- PRAKASH PADIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad