MOHAMMAD AKHLAK Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-2012-7-355
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on July 16,2012

Mohammad Akhlak Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri. T.D. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri. Sudhir Bharti, has appeared for respondents. Petitioner has filed this writ petition making the following prayers: (A) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 9.5.2012 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Moradabad. (B) issue a writ order in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 to pay the deposited advance money on behalf of work area 848.28 sq.m. or give permission to disposal of balance work area 848.28 sq.m. (C) issue any other and further writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (D) award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.
(2.) A bare perusal of the writ petition reveals that in connection with a contract with the railways, petitioner had Instituted original suit No. 822 of 2007. The said suit has been dismissed vide judgment and order dated 9.5.2012 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Moradabad. It is against the aforesaid judgment and order that the present writ petition has been filed with an ancillary prayer for the payment of certain amount and for permission to complete the balance work. Petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court without any sense of responsibility in a very casual manner as if the said jurisdiction is a remedy for every ill. Against the aforesaid judgment and order dismissing the suit the petitioner has a statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 96 of the C.P.C. There is no justification for the petitioner to come up in writ petition without availing the remedy so available to him in law.
(3.) IN view of above, as the petitioner has not availed the aforesaid remedy, I am of the opinion that the writ petition is not only misconceived but is ill advised. It is accordingly dismissed with a token cost of Rs.100 to be deposited by the petitioner within two weeks with the registry of the court failing which it shall be realised as arrears of land revenue.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.