LAL BAHADURversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                      WRIT - C No. - 11538 of 2026

Lal Bahadur
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)          :   Manish Chand Umrao
Counsel for Respondent(s)          :   C.S.C., Rakesh Kumar Srivastava

Court No. - 37
                    HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for
respondent no.4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
Perused the material available on record.

2. The instant writ petition has been instituted seeking issuance of a writ,
order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent
no.2 to consider and decide the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner
dated 31.01.2026 under Rule 6-Ka of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Kutumb
Register Anurakshan) Niyamawali, 1970, within a stipulated time frame.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no.4 has
fraudulently procured entries in the Parivar Register by incorporating forged
and fabricated particulars, showing his parentage as Nachakau and Smt.
Phoolkali, whereas in fact he is the son of Ramjeet s/o Pachai Patel and Smt.
Ramsakhi. It is contended that such manipulation in the Parivar Register has
serious consequences and affects the rights of the petitioner.

4. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a statutory appeal on
31.01.2026 before respondent no.2, who, vide order, directed respondent
no.3 to conduct an inquiry and submit a report within a period of one week.
However, despite lapse of considerable time, the said inquiry report has not
been submitted till date, resulting in inordinate delay in disposal of the
appeal, which has remained pending for more than six weeks. It is thus
urged that the inaction on the part of respondent no.3 has frustrated the
appellate proceedings and warrants interference by this Court.

5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is under grave threat
                                                                                             WRIC No. 11538 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    and has allegedly been subjected to a firearm assault by the private
                                    respondent, and is presently undergoing treatment at Swaroop Rani Hospital,
                                    Prayagraj. On account of such exigent circumstances, it is prayed that
                                    appropriate directions be issued to ensure expeditious conclusion of the
                                    proceedings so as to prevent further prejudice to the petitioner.

                                    6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.4 submits that the private
                                    respondent has already appeared and is participating in the proceedings
                                    before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (respondent no.2), and undertakes to
                                    cooperate in early disposal of the matter.

                                    7. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
                                    parties and keeping in view the nature of the controversy, this Court finds
                                    that the grievance of the petitioner is confined to expeditious disposal of the
                                    statutory appeal, which is pending consideration before the respondent no.2.
                                    The present writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to respondent
                                    no.2-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Karchana, District Prayagraj to
                                    decide the petitioner's appeal, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a
                                    reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of two weeks from
                                    the date of production of a certified copy of this order, after affording due
                                    opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties.

                                    April 20, 2026
                                    A. Tripathi
                                                                                             (Vinod Diwakar,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
AKHILESH TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad