Allahabad High Court
SHATRUGHAN MAURYAversusCHANDAN AND 9 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
The High Court directed the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jaunpur to decide the pending 6C application expeditiously, reaffirming its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.
Summary
The petitioner, Shatrughan Maurya, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jaunpur, to decide a 6C application filed on 15 May 2024 in Original Suit No. 328 of 2024. The High Court had earlier, on 6 February 2025, ordered the lower court to decide the 6C application expeditiously, without expressing any view on the merits. The petitioner contended that the lower court had not yet acted on the order and that the urgency application (80C) remained pending. The High Court observed that once an order is in the petitioner’s possession and filed before the lower court, the lower court is obligated to expedite the matter. Consequently, the Court affirmed its earlier direction and disposed of the petition, noting no reason to doubt the lower court’s compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct the lower court to decide a 6C application expeditiously under its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.
- Whether the lower court is obligated to act on the High Court’s direction without further hearing.
Subjects
- Article 227
- supervisory jurisdiction
- expeditious disposal
- 6C application
- Civil Procedure
- High Court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6882 of 2026
Shatrughan Maurya
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Chandan And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd. Sarwar Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.
1. Heard Sri Mohd. Sarwar Khan, learned counsel for the plaintiff-
petitioner.
2. The plaintiff-petitioner had earlier preferred petition under Article 227
No. 1186 of 2025 which came to be disposed of on 06.02.2025 while
passing the following orders.-
"1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner while notice to the respondents is dispensed
with in view of the proposed order.
2. The present petition has been filed praying for a direction to Civil Judge (Senior
Division), Jaunpur to decide 6 C application dated 15.5.2024 filed by the petitioner in
Original Suit No.328 of 2024 (Shatrughna Maurya Vs. Chandan and others),
expeditiously.
3. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jaunpur is, therefore, directed to decide 6 C
application dated 15.5.2024 filed by the petitioner in Original Suit No.328 of 2024
(Shatrughna Maurya Vs. Chandan and others)), if still pending, expeditiously without
granting any unnecessary adjournments to the parties, in case, there is no legal
impediment in deciding the aforesaid application.
4. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the
claim of either of the parties.
5. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of."
3. The order as per the plaintiff-petitioner is within the knowledge of the
A227 No. 6882 of 2026
2
Court as apparent from the order sheet dated 24.02.2025 but the 6C
application came to be preferred on 15.05.2024 in O.S. No. 328 of 2024
and urgency application 80C has not been decided.
4. In the opinion of the Court once an order is in possession of the
plaintiff petitioner and the same has been filed before the court below
then the court below is under obligation to expedite the process in that
regard.
5. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. This Court has no reasons
to disbelieve that the court below shall consider the urgency and as well
as the need of passing of an order in 6C application with most expedition.
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
May 18, 2026
Rajesh
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…