Allahabad High Court
SAROJ SONKARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition and directed the respondent court to decide the pending case expeditiously within six months.
Summary
The petitioner, Saroj Sonkar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the second respondent, a court, to decide a pending case (No. 3991/2025) expeditiously. The petitioner argued that the case had been pending since 2025 despite multiple dates being fixed. The High Court examined the petition and found that keeping the writ petition pending would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition and issued a direction to the respondent to decide the pending case within six months, after serving all parties and without unnecessary adjournments. The order was signed on 5 May 2026.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when a lower court unduly delays the disposal of a case?
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel a court to decide a pending case within a specified time.
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- judicial delay
- expeditious disposal
- High Court of Allahabad
- civil procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17528 of 2026
Saroj Sonkar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shachindra Kumar Mishra
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 Mandamus commanding the
Respondent No. 2 to decide the Case No. 3991/2025 (Saroj Sonkar vs. Vinay Kumar)
expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month."
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that aforementioned case is
pending since 2025 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.
May 5, 2026
Nitika Sri.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…