Om Raj Singh vs D.D.C. And 3 Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 4130 ALL

Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 4130 ALL
Judgement Date : 7 August, 2014

Allahabad High Court

Om Raj Singh vs D.D.C. And 3 Ors. on 7 August, 2014

Bench: Anjani Kumar Mishra




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 18
 

 
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 40885 of 2014
 

 
Petitioner :- Om Raj Singh
 
Respondent :- D.D.C. And 3 Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

Heard SRi Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to inferfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land in question.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the District Magistrate, Bijnore (Respondent no. 2) to decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously within a short span of time.

As far as relief one is concerned, it is a prayer for injunction. In case the petitioner wants an injunction to be issued in his favour, the better remedy for him is to file a civil suit for the same. Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for issuing injunction specially when there is an alternative remedy available by way of civil suit for that purpose.

The second relief is for mandamus directing respondent no. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner. A perusal of alleged representation indicates that various general complaints have been made against consolidation authorities. Even this relief cannot be granted in the facts and circumstances of the case for the following reasons.

First, the application/representation itself is devoid of any specific details. It is vague and contain general allegation. Secondly, the counsel for the petitioner could not point out any statutory provision under which such representation could be made. No mandamus can therefore be issued for deciding the representation of the petitioners.

Accordingly I find the writ petition to be misconceived. It is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 7.8.2014

SKS