Allahabad High Court
LOK PAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- PRAKASH PADIA
Holding
The Court held that the petition should be disposed by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation and the officer to decide it expeditiously.
Summary
The petitioner, Lok Pal Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Cane Officer of Bulandshahar to reimburse his and his wife's medical expenses and to decide on representations he had submitted on 27‑05‑2025 and 05‑02‑2026, which the officer allegedly refused to accept. The petitioner alleged that the officer's refusal was a prohibited practice. The Court examined the pleadings and found no merit to be decided on the substantive reimbursement claim at this stage. It noted that the officer's refusal to accept the representation was contrary to law and therefore deprecated. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition by ordering the petitioner to file a fresh representation with all necessary documents within three weeks, after which the officer must decide the matter within six weeks. The order was issued without adjudicating the reimbursement claim itself.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the District Cane Officer to accept and decide the petitioner's representation.
- Whether the officer's refusal to accept the representation is a violation of statutory duty warranting judicial intervention.
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- administrative law
- representation
- reimbursement
- Cane Department
- procedural compliance
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6673 of 2026
Lok Pal Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Raj Mohan Saggi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
1.Heard Sri Raj Mohan Saggi, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following
prayer:-
i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing to the respondent no.4 to reimbursement the amount
of medical bills of the petitioner to the tune of Rs.46910/-and
amount of Rs.67187/-of his wife with interest;
ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondent no.4 to decide the representation of
the petitioner dated 27.05.2025 and 05.02.2026 (Annexure No.
9 and 10); in the interest of justice;
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that when a
representation in this regard was submitted by the petitioner before the
respondent no.4/District Cane Officer, Cane Department Bulandshahar,
he refused to accept the same.
4. This practice of respondent No.4 is deprecated by this Court.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and without entering into
WRIA No. 6673 of 2026
2
merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the
petitioner to submit fresh representation along with necessary papers and
documents as well as certified copy of this order before the respondent
No.4/District Cane Officer, Cane Department Bulandshahar within a
period of three weeks. In cse, the petitioner does so, the respondent No.4
will take a decision in the matter most expeditiously and preferably within
a period of six weeks thereafter strictly in accordance with law.
(Prakash Padia,J.)
May 5, 2026
saqlain
Digitally signed by :-
SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…