Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71136 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12826 of 2025 Petitioner :- Kishan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Adarsh Singh,Kumar Parikshit,Rageeni,Rama Shankar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. The present petition has been filed with the following prayer: "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing/commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the representation made by the petitioner dated 02.11.2023 within stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court, otherwise applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 2. From the perusal of the representation of the petitioner, it is clear that fisheries lease has been allotted in favour of the respondent no. 4 by the respondent authorities which is being challenged in the writ petition. 3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner can challenge the fisheries lease granted to the respondent no. 4 by filing an appeal under Rule 59 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, which provides that any person aggrieved may prefer an appeal before Collector. Rule 59 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 is quoted as under: "59. Every lease referred to in rule 57 or rule 58 shall be deemed to be a lease for agricultural purpose, and any person aggrieved thereby may prefer an appeal to the Collector within 30 days from the date of approval by the Sub-Divisional Officer and subject to the provisions of Section 210, the order of the Collector shall be final." 4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to entertain the instant petition. 5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy as available to him under law. Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Ved Prakash (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad