Allahabad High Court
LAL BABU SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The Court directed the Sub‑Divisional Officer to decide the pending proceeding expeditiously in accordance with Rule 109(10) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, and disposed of the petition.
Summary
Petitioner Lal Babu Singh filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Officer (respondent No. 2) to decide case No. 7072/2024 filed under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which had been pending since 2024. The petitioner argued that the proceeding should be decided within six months as mandated by Sub‑Rule (10) of Rule 109 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, and that the delay violated this statutory time‑limit. The Court examined the provision requiring the Sub‑Divisional Officer to endeavour to decide the suit within six months and to record reasons for any delay. Finding no justification for further postponement, the Court directed the respondent to decide the matter expeditiously, without unnecessary adjournments, after hearing the parties. The petition was consequently disposed of with the direction to the respondent.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Sub‑Divisional Officer to decide a revenue suit within the six‑month period prescribed under Rule 109(10) of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
- Whether the delay in deciding case No. 7072/2024 violates the statutory mandate and warrants judicial intervention.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 116
- U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 109(10)
Subjects
- mandamus
- revenue code
- statutory time limit
- sub‑divisional officer
- delay in adjudication
- U.P. Revenue Code
- Rule 109
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17506 of 2026
Lal Babu Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sandeep Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, 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-respondents and perused the record.
2. The writ petition has been filed seeking following relief :-
"i- issue a writ order or direction in nature of mandamus directing the
respondent no. 2 to decide the Case no. 7072/2024 bearing its
Computerized Case по. Т202402030507072 (Lal Babu versus Param
Hans & others), under section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code-2006 pending
before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Karchhana, District
Prayagraj within a stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the proceedings
under Section 116 of U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 are pending since 2024.
It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that
appropriate directions be issued to respondent no. 2 to decide the same
within a stipulated time or in a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner brought attention of the Court to Sub
Rule (10) of Rule 109 of U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016,
"Rule 109. Preliminary and Final decrees (Section 117), is quoted as
under:
(10) The Sub-Divisional Officer shall make an endeavour to
decide the suit within the period of six months and if the suit
WRIC No. 17506 of 2026
2
is not decided within such period, the reason shall be
recorded."
5. In view of the provisions as contemplated in Sub Rule (10) of Rule 109
of U.P. Revenue Code, 2016, no useful purpose would be served in
keeping this petition pending.
6. The respondent no. 2 is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid
pending proceeding under Section 116 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006,
before him, in accordance with law, expeditiously, after 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, keeping in view the mandate of Sub Rule (10) of Rule 109 of
U.P. Revenue Code, 2016, quoted above.
7. With these observation, this petition is disposed of.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
May 5, 2026
Nitika Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…