Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16432 of 2021 Petitioner :- Jagar Nath Prasad Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Pati Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J. Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.
Sri Yogendra Pati Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner has absented himself in second round. Learned counsel for the State is present.
This writ petition has been filed with following prayer:-
"(1) Issue, a writ or direction in the nature mandamus commanding the respondents to comply the order dated 20.12.2002 of the court below and specially the police personnel forthwith followed dignity of the of the Judicial Order, for give the possession to the petitioner and therefore relevant direction be also issued accordingly.
(2) Issue, a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing to the Respondents are not interfere peaceful possession of the petitioner of the aforesaid land/property.
(3) Issue, a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing to the Respondent no.2 to decide the objection/application dated 26.02.2020 of the petitioner, same is still pending till today.
(4) Issue, any other order or suitable order or direction in the nature in which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."
The prayer prayed for as such that the civil court is sought to be by-passed if the petitioner wants to compliance of the order of court below, procedure is enunciated in the Civil Procedure Code for which writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India will not lie.
Learned counsel for the State has submitted that this is belated petition also, which cannot be entertained after a period of long delay. No mandamus can be granted to decide the lis between the private parties, in which civil remedy is the proper remedy.
Looking to the prayer made in the petition, it is very clear from the submission of counsel for the State, the prayer prayed for cannot be granted. The writ petition will have to be dismissed.
After passing of the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has presented himself before the Court and submitted that earlier writ petitions were being entertained by this High Court. Be that as it may, there are disputed question of facts also. However, we request the respondent no.2 to decide the objection/application dated 26.02.2020 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.
It goes without saying that on merits, we have not gone into the details except holding that issuance of writ is not a proper remedy.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 AK Pandey