Allahabad High Court
SMT. PRITI SHUKLAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The Court directed the respondent to decide the pending case expeditiously within six months, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
Summary
Petitioner Smt. Priti Shukla filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Nayab Tehsildar of Prayagraj to decide a pending revenue case (Case No.3120 of 2026) under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code. The petitioner argued that despite several dates being fixed, the case remained undecided, causing undue delay. The Court examined the petition and found that continued pendency served no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition and ordered the respondent to decide the pending case expeditiously, preferably within six months of the order, after serving all parties and without unnecessary adjournments. The order was signed by the Hon'ble Justice Manish Kumar Nigam.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Nayab Tehsildar to decide a pending revenue case within a stipulated time
- Whether the delay in deciding the case violates the provisions of Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code — s. 34
Subjects
- Writ of Mandamus
- Administrative Delay
- U.P. Revenue Code
- Expeditious Disposal
- Civil Procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 15386 of 2026
Smt. Priti Shukla
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for following relief:
"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus direct the
respondent no.2 i.e. Nayab Tehsildar, Laltara, Mandal Prayagraj, Tehsil Soraon,
District Prayagraj to decide the Case No.3120 of 2026, Computer Case
No.T202602030303120 (Smt. Priti Shukla Vs. Anil Mishra) under Section 34 of U.P.
Revenue Code within stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that aforementioned case is
pending consideration and the same has not been decided despite several dates have
been fixed. He prayed that the same may be decided, expeditiously.
4. In view of above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition
pending.
5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to
respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned case, in accordance with
law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order after ensuring service upon all the opposite
parties, giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting
unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal
impediment.
April 23, 2026
Nitika Sri.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…