DEVANAND AND 7 OTHERSversusAMIT KUMAR AND 5 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5764 of 2026

Devanand And 7 Others
                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus

Amit Kumar And 5 Others
                                                                  .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                         :    Saksham Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s)                         :


Court No. - 9
                 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

     "(a) To direct the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division),
     District- Gautam Budh Nagar to decide the Suit No. 652 of 2022
     (Devanand and Others vs Amit Kumar and Others) filed by the
     plaintiffs/petitioners, within the stipulated time period as it may deem fit
     and proper, given the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise
     petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

2. From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the petitioner has prayed
for early disposal of Original Suit No. 652 of 2022 (Devanand and Others vs
Amit Kumar and Others), pending before the court of Civil Judge (Senior
Division) District- Gautam Budh Nagar.

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 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
                                                                  A227 No. 5764 of 2026
                                    2


     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. 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;"

5. In view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Apex Court as well as
                                                                                               A227 No. 5764 of 2026
                                                                      3


                                    Division Bench judgment of this Court in High Court Bar Association,
                                    Allahabad (supra) and Ali Shad Usmani (supra), this Court declines to
                                    grant the relief as prayed for.

                                    6. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

                                    7. Registrar (Compliance) to communicate this order to court concerned,
                                    within 48 hours.



                                                                                       (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
                                    April 29, 2026
                                    (V. S. SINGH)




Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad