Allahabad High Court
ISHTIAQ ABDIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- DINESH PATHAK
Holding
The Court directed the Consolidation Officer to decide the pending case within ten months, issuing a mandamus and disposing of the writ petition without addressing its merits.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Consolidation Officer, Handia, Prayagraj, to decide a computerized case (No. 20205402323040286 of 2024) filed under Section 52(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act within a reasonable time. The petitioner’s counsel requested a correction to the prayer clause, which was allowed. The standing counsel for the State had no objection to a direction for expeditious disposal. The Court, finding no merit-based observation necessary, ordered the respondent to decide the case by a reasoned order within ten months of the certified copy of the order, without unnecessary adjournments, and disposed of the writ petition. No substantive merits of the underlying case were addressed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court can issue a mandamus directing the Consolidation Officer to decide the pending case within a stipulated period under Section 52(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
- Whether such a direction is appropriate to ensure expeditious disposal without infringing on the officer’s discretion.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act — s. 52(2)
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act
- administrative law
- expeditious disposal
- consolidation officer
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - B No. - 708 of 2026
Ishtiaq Abdi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Kumar, Girish Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 54
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for and permitted
to correct the prayer clause 1 of the writ petition, during course of the day
3. Instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following relief:-
"issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding
the respondent no.2/ Consolidation Officer, Handia, Prayagraj to decide
the Computerized Case No. 20205402323040286 of 2024 filed under
section 52(2) read with Rule 109 Ka of the U.P. Consolidation of
Holdings Act within stipulated period of time as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper considering the facts and circumstances of the case."
4. Learned Standing Counsel has no objection, if a direction is issued to
decide the aforesaid case, expeditiously.
5. In this conspectus as above, no useful purpose would be served by
keeping this matter pending. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation
on the merits of the case, as raised in the writ petition, with a direction to
Respondent no.2 to decide the aforesaid case strictly in accordance with law,
by means of a reasoned and speaking order, after affording opportunity of
hearing to the parties concerned and without granting any unnecessary
adjournments to either of the parties expeditiously, preferably, within a
period of ten months from the date of production of certified copy of this
order.
WRIB No. 708 of 2026
2
6. With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
March 18, 2026
vkg
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…