Allahabad High Court
SMT. GENA DEVI @ GYANMATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The court directed the revenue officer to decide the pending restoration application within twelve weeks, effectively granting the writ of mandamus.
Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Gena Devi, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the revenue officer (respondent No.2) to decide a land restoration application filed in 2022 under Sections 34 and 209 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner alleged that despite several dates being fixed, the application remained pending. The court, after hearing counsel, noted that the petition served no useful purpose if left unresolved and, without addressing the merits, ordered the respondent to decide the restoration application within twelve weeks, ensuring service, hearing, and evidence, and to avoid unnecessary adjournments. The order was signed on May 6, 2026, and the petition was disposed of finally. The decision emphasizes expeditious disposal of pending administrative applications under the Revenue Code.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the revenue officer to decide a pending restoration application under Sections 34/209 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
- Whether the court can set a time‑bound deadline for the decision without examining the merits of the application.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 209, 34
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- restoration of land
- U.P. Revenue Code
- administrative delay
- expeditious disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 16418 of 2026
Smt. Gena Devi @ Gyanmati
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Awadhesh Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing
Counsel for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondent no.2 to decide restoration
application filed by petitioner in Case No. 516 of 2022 (New
No. T202217630208223) (Sahdev and others Vs. Brijlal),
under Section 34/209 (ज) U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, Village
Pedari Bujurg, Tappa Hata, Pargana Bansi Poorab, Tehsil
Bansi, District Siddharthnagar, within specified period."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the aforesaid
restoration application is pending since 2022. It is further
contended that several dates have been fixed but the same has not
been decided yet. He prayed that the same may be decided,
expeditiously.
4. No useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition
pending.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present
WRIC No. 16418 of 2026
2
petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent
No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned application, in
accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of
this order after ensuring service upon all the opposite parties and
giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned as well as
opportunity to lead evidence in support of their case and without
granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties
provided that there is no other legal impediment.
May 6, 2026 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…