Allahabad High Court
GIRISH CHANDRA SONKARversusRAMAKANT AND 14 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
The High Court held that, absent exceptional circumstances, it cannot direct a subordinate court to dispose of a suit within a stipulated period.
Summary
Petitioner Girish Chandra Sonkar filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Civil Judge (Junior Division) to decide his civil suit (No. 3078 of 2022) within a stipulated period. The High Court examined whether it could impose a time‑bound schedule on a subordinate court. It relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in High Court Bar Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) 6 SCC 267, which holds that constitutional courts should not fix such schedules except in exceptional circumstances, and on the Division Bench decision in Ali Shad Usmani v. Ali Isteba (2015) 2 ADJ 250 (DB), which declined to direct expeditious hearing of a civil suit. Applying these precedents, the Court found no exceptional urgency and declined to issue the direction. The petition was dismissed, with the Court advising the petitioner to move an application for expeditious disposal before the trial court itself.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court can issue a direction under Article 227 to a subordinate civil court to decide a suit within a stipulated time period.
- Whether the circumstances of the present case constitute an 'exceptional' situation justifying a time‑bound schedule.
Subjects
- Article 227
- Article 226
- writ petition
- expeditious disposal
- time‑bound schedule
- subordinate courts
- high court jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12630 of 2026
Girish Chandra Sonkar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Ramakant And 14 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Jeet Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-
"I) Issue an order or direction directing the Civil Judge (Junior Junior
Division) Court no., 23 Allahabad to decide the Civil suit bearing n suit
no. 3078 of 2022 (Girish Chandra Sonkar Versus Ramakant and others)
pending before the aforesaid court within stipulated period."
2. Recently, the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in High
Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and
others (2024) 6 SCC 267 has held that Constitution Courts should refrain
from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending
before any other courts. The Court further held that issue of prioritising
the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts
concerned where the cases are pending. Relevant para 47.3 of the said
judgment is extracted hereasunder :-
"Constitutional courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a
time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other
courts. Constitutional courts may issue directions for the time-bound
disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of
prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the
courts concerned where the cases are pending;"
3. The Division Bench of this Court in Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba,
2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB) has held that no direction can be issued to the
A227 No. 12630 of 2026
2
sub-ordinate courts for deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant
portion of the judgment is extracted hereasunder:-
"We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a
Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division),
District-Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a
writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the
Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit.
Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a
separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of
similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the
normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest
care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will
be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits,
which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot
afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be
in a position to have the benefit of such an order.
Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the
concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been
made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving
senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a
particular disablilty socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause
of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply
his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited.
For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The
petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost."
4. In view of above, this Court declines to direct the court below to
expedite the proceedings pending before it.
5. The petitioner may, however, move an application for expeditious
disposal of Suit No. 3078 of 2022 (Girish Chandra Sonkar Versus
Ramakant and others) before the court concerned who will decide the
same on the basis of pendency of cases before it and also keeping in mind
the dictum of Hon’ble Apex Court.
A227 No. 12630 of 2026
3
6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Registrar (Compliance) to communicate this order to court concerned,
within 48 hours.
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
September 14, 2026
(V. S. SINGH)
Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…