HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 16206 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs :- " i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 18.4.2022 (as Annexure-3 to this writ petition) passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate Ghaziabad respondent no.3. ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the arbitration case no.1622/2022 Amir Azam vs. Chairman Ministry of Road Transport and Highways on merit after giving full opportunity of hearing to both parties." 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the contesting respondents has raised an objection qua the maintainability of the instant writ petition on two fold submissions. Firstly, the instant writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and latches as no satisfactory and plausible explanation has been averred in the writ petition to meet out the delay and laches. Secondly, the petitioner has an efficacious statutory remedy of Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Virendra Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Pranjal Mehrotra, Vaibhav Tripathi Amir Azam .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the Act, 1996') against the order impugned dated 18.04.2022 and once the efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, there is no reason or occasion to bypass the statutory forum. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances and the relief as prayed for, we are not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition as the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy for redressal of his grievance. However, we leave it open to the petitioner to invoke the efficacious remedy before the competent court in accordance with law. 5. With the aforesaid leave, the writ petition stands disposed of. May 6, 2026 Sumit S WRIC No. 16206 of 2026 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad