KISMATUNNISHA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 5 OTHERS
WRIC/9158/2025 · 2025-09-19
Manjive Shukla, Sangeeta Chandra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 165266 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 165266 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9158 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.
HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. Heard Shri Sanjay Shankar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This captioned writ petition has been filed by the petitioner interalia praying the following reliefs :-
"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party no.1 to 4 to restore the possession of the petitioner in shop in question. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party no.1 to 3 to take action against the police personnel of Police Chowki Husainabad, Police Station Rehra Bazar, District Balrampur." Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent no.6 had dispossessed the petitioner from the shop in question with the help of the police authorities therefore her possession may be restored. On the other hand Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no.1 to 4 has submitted that the arguments raised by the petitioner that the police had helped the respondent no.6 in taking over possession of the shop in question is absolutely incorrect. He further submits that the subject matter of the writ petition is absolutely private dispute in between Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Shanker Pandey, Anwar Ashfaq Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Kismatunnisha .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)
the petitioner and respondent no.6 in respect of possession on a shop. Learned Standing Counsel has also submitted that in the matters of private dispute among the parties writ petition before this Court is not appropriate remedy as for deciding possession etc factual issues are to be seen and that can be properly appreciated and decided by the competent civil court. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and we find that the subject matter of this writ petition is purely private dispute between the petitioner and respondent no.6, therefore, we are of the view that this writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to avail adequate remedy under law. September 19, 2025 mks WRIC No. 9158 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Mrs.
Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench