Mangla Prasad vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 14991 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:102979
 
Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5280 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Mangla Prasad
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Utsav Singh,Ashutosh Ganguli
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Order on Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. 3 of 2023.

1. Present application has been filed by petitioner seeking amendment in the prayer clause of the writ petition.

2. As there is no serious challenge to the amendment application by learned counsel for the respondents, in view of the said fact, the amendment application is allowed.

Order on Petition.

1. Heard Shri Ashutosh Ganguli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Shravan Kumar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2.

2. The present petition has been instituted for seeking an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the official respondent to proceed with the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings as finalized against the respondent no. 3 and further prayed to lodge the F.I.R. against the respondent no. 3.

3. The petitioner being the Home Guard and his services have been terminated way back in the year 2016 itself which were never ever challenged before any competent authority and the prayer made by way of instituting the present petition is solely against the respondent no. 3.

4. So far as regarding the prayer for taking decision in pursuance to the disciplinary proceedings whatsoever has been initiated against the respondent no. 3, the petitioner is having no locus for instituting a petition against a private person, but if he is so aggrieved with any of the order passed by the respondent no. 3, the alternative remedy was available before the petitioner for institution of the specific case as settled in the Full Bench Judgment rendered by this Court in Writ A No. 30084 of 2003 (Rajveer Singh versus State of U.P. & Others) decided on 01.10.2018.

5. With regard to the another prayer for lodging the F.I.R. is concerned, the alternative remedy is available before the petitioner to pursue before the appropriate Court for seeking similar directions.

6. It is crystal clear that the remedy as sought by the petitioner through the instant petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not permissible under Law.

7. In view of the observation made above, the writ petition stands dismissed.

Order Date :- 12.5.2023

SY