Sahu Land Developers Pvt. Ltd Vs State of U.P (Allahabad High Court)
Allahabad High Court held that writ petition under Article 226 is not be maintainable if there is an alternative remedy under different jurisdiction of the same High Court. Accordingly, writ by developers challenging concurrent orders of Consumer Commissions dismissed.
Facts- The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned judgement and order dated August 1, 2024 and January 9, 2024 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow and District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow respectively. The petitioner in furtherance prays for the issuance of a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the respondent no. 5 to 7 as well as other complainants in respect of recovery of claims. Moreover, the petitioner further prays for writ of mandamus commanding the Commissioner, Lucknow to specify the time frame to conclude the consolidation operation in the concerned area.
Conclusion- Supreme Court in Rikhab Chand Jain has held that writ petition under Article 226 would not be maintainable if there is an alternative remedy under different jurisdiction of the same High Court.
