AKHILESH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTOR SHAHJAHANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) Petitioner operated the theka but he has not paid the theka dues. He has filed this writ petition alleging that theka dues cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue. Even assuming that the said dues cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue, we are not inclined to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is no dispute that the petitioner has operated the theka but he has now raised a technical ground to obtain a stay order by filing this writ petition.

(3.) Writ jurisdiction is a discretionary remedy. Since the petitioner has operated the theka and collected the money, there is no equity in his favour.