Ram Swaroop vs Additional Commissioner ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 7929 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ram Swaroop vs Additional Commissioner ... on 19 June, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35865
 
Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5914 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Ram Swaroop
 
Respondent :- Additional Commissioner (Administration)Lucknow Division,Lko. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyan Sagar Gupta,Aditya Vikram Shahi,Bajhul Quamar Siddiqui,Shivani Gupta
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Gyan Sagar Gupta, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Raj Baksh Singh, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

2. By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 20.05.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration) in Appeal No. 2196/2023 under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, whereby the appeal filed against the order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Purva, District Unnao was dismissed.

3. The learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has got a statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 208 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

4. Replying to the aforesaid preliminary objection, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Ved Prakash & 7 Ors. v. State of U.P. & 3 Ors., wherein this Court has entertained a writ petition filed against an order passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi in a appeal filed under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

5. The question of entertainability of the writ petition in spite of availability of statutory remedy was not dealt with in the judgment of this Court in Ved Prakash (Supra) and, therefore, the aforesaid judgment is not a binding precedent for deciding the question of entertainability of the writ petition filed against an order under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code in spite of availability of statutory remedy under Section 208 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

6. As the petitioner has got a statutory remedy available, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the extra ordinary discretionary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without affecting the petitioner's right to file special appeal under Section 208 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

8. Office is directed to return certified copies of the orders annexed with the writ petition after retaining photocopies thereof on record.

Order Date :- 19.6.2025

Pradeep/-