HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 30709 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities (Respondent No.2) to take appropriate action in pursuance of complaint made by the petitioner against respondent No. 6 & 7. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents authorities to stop payment of Maharani Traders (Respondent No.6) forthwith or within a time as specified by this Hon'ble Court. (iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to conduct enquiry against the respondent No.7, forthwith or within a time as specified by this Hon'ble Court." 3. The petitioner is the complainant and he is not an aggrieved person. The settled law is that a writ petition can be maintained only by a person whose legal rights have been infringed. A stranger or a mere complainant, who is not directly affected, has no locus to challenge such an order. 4. In Jasbhai Motibhai Desai v. Roshan Kumar, Haji Bashir Ahmed & Ors., (1976) 1 SCC 671, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a person who is not an aggrieved party cannot maintain a writ petition unless he demonstrates infringement of a legally enforceable right. The principle Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Deepak Gaur Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ajay Sengar, C.S.C. Guru Dayal .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 7 Others .....Respondent(s) has been reiterated in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2013) 4 SCC 465, wherein it was held that only a person who suffers a legal injury can invoke the writ jurisdiction. 5. In this regard, reference may be made to the judgment of this Court in Smt. Anita Kumari v. State of U.P. & Ors., 2021 (5) ADJ 470, wherein this Court has held that “a stranger to the proceedings, who is not affected directly or whose legal rights are not infringed, cannot maintain a writ petition merely on the basis of being a complainant.” 6. In such view of the fact, the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present writ petition. 7. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. September 25, 2025 Karan WRIC No. 30709 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad