Allahabad High Court
RADHIKAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The Court directed the Consolidation Officer to decide the pending case within three months, deeming such direction necessary to prevent undue delay.
Summary
Radhika filed a writ petition (WRIT‑B No. 4167 of 2026) seeking a direction to the Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Mau (respondent No. 2), to decide the pending proceedings of Case No. 1274 of 2025 under Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Child Health (UPCH) Act. The petitioner argued that the case had been pending for an inordinate period and that a court‑ordered time‑frame would ensure justice. The State’s standing counsel raised no objection to the prayer. The High Court, after considering the submissions, held that directing the officer to dispose of the matter within a specific period would serve the ends of justice. Consequently, the Court ordered the Consolidation Officer to decide the case expeditiously, preferably within three months of service of the certified copy of the order. The petition was therefore disposed of in favour of the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a direction under Section 12 of the UPCH Act for the Consolidation Officer to decide a pending case within a specified time‑frame.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Child Health Act — s. 12
Subjects
- writ petition
- expeditious disposal
- Section 12
- UPCH Act
- consolidation officer
- administrative direction
- delay in justice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 4167 of 2026
Radhika
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mayank Krishna Singh Chandel, Vinod
Kumar Chandel
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 50
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the
State-respondent.
Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed notice upon the
private respondents is hereby dispensed with.
The limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is to issue a
direction to the respondent no. 2 i.e. Consolidation Officer Sadar, Mau, to
decide the proceedings of Case No. 1274 of 2025 under Section 12 of UPCH
Act, within the time frame fixed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case filed by the petitioner is
pending consideration since long and the purpose of filing the present
petition would stand served if appropriate directions are issued to the
respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the aforesaid case within a time
frame fixed by this Court.
Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the aforesaid proposition.
Considering the totality of the circumstances and submissions advanced by
learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that ends of
justice would stand sub served if directions are issued for expeditious
disposal of aforesaid case.
Accordingly, the present petition is disposed off by requiring the respondent
No. 2 i.e. Consolidation Officer Sadar, Mau, seized with the Case No. 1274
WRIB No. 4167 of 2026
2
of 2025 under Section 12 of UPCH Act, to consider and decide the same,
expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months upon service of
certified copy of the order of this Court, in accordance with law.
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
September 18, 2026
Deepak/
Digitally signed by :-
DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…