Allahabad High Court
NAND LALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The High Court may direct a respondent to decide a pending stay application within a fixed period to prevent undue delay.
Summary
Petitioner Nand Lal filed a writ petition seeking a court direction to respondent No.2 to decide a stay application filed with Revision No.5361 of 2025, which had been pending due to routine adjournments. The petitioner argued that the delay was unwarranted and sought an expeditious resolution. The Court examined whether it could compel a respondent to dispose of a pending application within a fixed timeframe. It held that the High Court has the authority to issue such a direction to prevent undue delay. Accordingly, the petition was disposed with an order directing respondent No.2 to decide the stay application within two months of receiving the certified copy of the order, after hearing the parties.
Issues considered
- Can the High Court direct a respondent to decide a pending stay application within a specified period?
- Do routine adjournments justify issuance of a mandatory time‑frame direction?
Subjects
- writ petition
- stay application
- adjournment
- expeditious disposal
- court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 1780 of 2026
Nand Lal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Harish Chandra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C.
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Sri Harish Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 3. Sri Azad Rai has
accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.8.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction upon respondent
no.2 to decide the stay application of teh petitioner filed alongwith
Revision No.5361 of 2025, expeditiously, within a time frame as fixed by
this Court.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the stay
application filed alongwith the revision before respondent no.2 is pending
consideration since 2025, which is being unnecessarily adjourned in a
routine manner.
4. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition stands disposed of with a
direction upon the respondent no.2 to decide the pending stay application
in the revision, as noticed above, by passing appropriate order, in
accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties
concerned, within a period of two months from the date of presentation of
certified copy of this order.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
April 23, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…