Allahabad High Court
MOHAMMAD AYUB KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 11 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The court held that the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate must decide the pending stay application expeditiously, within six weeks, and may be directed by mandamus to do so.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohammad Ayub Khan, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate of Sikandarpur, Ballia to decide a stay application pending in appeal No. 20261509020215. The petitioner alleged that despite several dates being fixed, the stay application remained undecided, causing undue delay. The court, after hearing counsel, declined to opine on the merits of the underlying dispute but ordered the magistrate to decide the stay application expeditiously, preferably within six weeks of the certified copy of the order, ensuring service and hearing to all parties and prohibiting unnecessary adjournments. The direction was issued without any other legal impediment. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with the mandated direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate to decide a pending stay application
- Whether the delay in deciding the stay application violates the petitioner's right to speedy justice
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- stay application
- expeditious disposal
- Sub‑Divisional Magistrate
- procedural delay
- Article 226
- Civil Procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17428 of 2026
Mohammad Ayub Khan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 11 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rishabh Kumar Pandey,
Santosh Kumar Upadhyay
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 the stay application
filed by petitioner in appeal no. 20261509020215 (Mohd.
Ayub Khan Vs Riyajuddin Khan and others) pending before
the respondent no.2 i.e.-Sub- Divisional Magistrate,
Sikandarpur Ballia within some stipulated period and be
further pleased to direct the parties to maintain status quo
over the land in dispute till the decision of stay application
filed by petitioner."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the aforesaid stay
application in appeal is pending consideration. 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.
WRIC No. 17428 of 2026
2
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present
petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent
No. 2 to consider and decide the aforementioned stay application,
in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period
of six 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 and
without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the
parties provided that there is no other legal impediment.
May 5, 2026 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…