U.P JAL NIGAM AND ANR. versus NARESHWAR SAHAI MATHUR AND ANR.

U.P JAL NIGAM AND ANR. versus NARESHWAR SAHAI MATHUR AND ANR.

When a statutory tribunal is constituted to consider service grievances of government servants, it is a statutory obligation to first avail of the statutory remedy provided; writ petitions should not be entertained unless the tribunal remedy is exhausted.

Parties
Appellant: U.P. Jal Nigam; Respondent: Nareshwar Sahai Mathur; Appellant: R.B. Misra; Respondent: Syed Abu Ahmad; Respondent: M.S. Bisht
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 October 1994
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Writ Petition, Statutory Remedy, Jurisdiction
Service Law Administrative Law Writ Petition Statutory Remedy Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

U.P. Jal Nigam

Appellant

Nareshwar Sahai Mathur

Respondent

R.B. Misra

Appellant

Syed Abu Ahmad

Respondent

M.S. Bisht

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether writ petitions in service matters should be entertained by High Courts without first availing statutory remedy before Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

When a statutory tribunal is constituted to consider service grievances of government servants, it is a statutory obligation to first avail of the statutory remedy provided; writ petitions should not be entertained unless the tribunal remedy is exhausted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • High Court to transmit papers to Tribunal.
  • Respondents are open to avail statutory remedy before Tribunal.