Allahabad High Court
M/S RIYA CONSTRUCTION AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the respondent to decide the petitioner’s application within six weeks, without deciding the merits of the case.
Summary
Petitioner Riya Construction & others filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing Respondent No.2 to decide an application filed on 3 February 2026 and to ensure payment of the amount claimed. The petitioner alleged that despite filing the application, no decision had been taken, causing prejudice. The Court examined the petition and, without adjudicating the merits of the underlying dispute, ordered Respondent No.4 to decide the pending application within six weeks of the certified copy of the order. The direction was issued to enforce the duty of the authority under the relevant rules and to prevent undue delay. The Court clarified that it was not passing any substantive order on the merits, merely directing compliance with procedural obligations.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing an administrative authority to decide a pending application and ensure payment.
- Whether the delay in deciding the application violates principles of natural justice warranting judicial intervention.
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- administrative delay
- natural justice
- high court
- direction
- payment
- application pending
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10500 of 2026
M/S Riya Construction And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashvni Mishra, Sandeep Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for
respondents.
2. Present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"A). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding directing the
respondent no.2 to decide the application dated 3.2.2026 and to ensure that the payment
amount is provided by respondent no.2 to petitioners within a stipulate period in the interest of
justice."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for redressal of his
grievance, petitioner has filed application on 3.2.2026 before the respondent
no.2, but till date no decision has been taken. Lastly, he submitted that
suitable direction may be issued to respondent No. 2 to decide the aforesaid
application within a stipulated time, for which learned standing counsel has no
objection.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is
disposed of directing respondent No. 4 to decide the aforesaid application of
the petitioner dated 3.2.2026 in accordance with law maximum within period of
six weeks from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merits. It is
upon respondent No. 4 to pass order after considering the relevant Rules as
well as facts of the case.
March 19, 2026
Junaid
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
JUNAID AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…