Allahabad High Court
AMAR NATHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The Court held that it can issue a mandamus directing the authority to decide the pending application expeditiously.
Summary
Petitioner Amar Nath filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing Respondent No.3 to decide an application dated 24 September 2020 filed under Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 for land demarcation. The petitioner alleged that the application remained pending despite several dates being fixed, causing undue delay. The Court examined the petition and found that the continued pendency served no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court ordered the respondent to decide the pending application expeditiously, preferably within three months of the certified copy of the order, after giving a hearing and without unnecessary adjournments. The petition was thereafter disposed of with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the revenue authority to decide a pending application under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a stipulated period.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 24
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- U.P. Revenue Code
- land demarcation
- administrative delay
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17457 of 2026
Amar Nath
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Pratap Singh
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:
" (1) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the
respondent no.3 shall decide the application dated 24.09.2020 filed by applicant
under Section 24 U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for demarcation within stipulated period
provide by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that aforementioned
application 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. 3 to consider and decide the aforementioned application, in
accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three 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.
May 5, 2026
Nitika Sri.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…