Allahabad High Court
SITA RAM AGARWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that it could issue a mandamus directing the respondent to decide the representation within two months, without deciding the merits of the representation.
Summary
The petitioner, Sita Ram Agarwal, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Executive Officer, Sirsa, to consider and decide a representation dated 03‑06‑2026 that had not been acted upon. The petitioner alleged undue delay in the decision of his representation and requested the Court to set a time‑limit for the respondent to decide. The Court examined the petition and, without adjudicating the merits of the representation, ordered the respondent to decide it within two months of the certified copy of the order, after providing a hearing to all concerned. The direction was issued in the nature of mandamus to compel administrative action. The petition was disposed of with the directive, and the Court clarified that it had not passed any judgment on the substantive issues of the representation.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Executive Officer to decide a pending representation within a stipulated time
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- administrative delay
- representation
- High Court of Allahabad
- procedural direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17762 of 2026
Sita Ram Agarwal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arun Kumar Tripathi, Mitesh Agrawal
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for
State-respondents.
2. Present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to
respondent Executive Officer Sirsa to consider and decide the representation dated 03.06.2025
in accordance with law, within stipulated time as per fixed by this Hon'ble court."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for redressal of his
grievance, petitioner has filed representation dated 03.06.2026 before
respondent No. 2, but till date no decision has been taken. Lastly, it is
submitted that a direction may be issued to respondent No. 2 to decide the
aforesaid representation within a stipulated time, for which learned standing
counsel has no objection.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is
disposed of directing respondent No. 2 to decide the representation of the
petitioner dated 03.06.2026 in accordance with law maximum within period of
two months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order after
providing opportunity of hearing to all concerned.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merits. It is
upon respondent No. 2 to pass order after considering the relevant Rules as
well as facts of the case.
May 6, 2026
Sartaj
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SARTAJ AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…