Allahabad High Court

TOULAN GUPTA @ UMASHANKAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Decided: 18 March 2026
Bench: PRAKASH PADIA

Holding

The Sub‑Divisional Magistrate must decide the representation within the three‑month period prescribed by Section 24(3) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and the court directed compliance.

Summary

Petitioner Toulan Gupta filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate of Handia, Prayagraj, to decide a representation dated 16 May 2023 filed under Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner argued that Section 24(3) mandates that such proceedings be concluded within three months of the application. The court noted that the statutory period had elapsed without a final decision. Relying on the clear language of the statute, the court directed the magistrate to decide the representation unless a legal impediment exists. The petition was disposed with the order to comply with the time‑bound requirement.

Issues considered

Whether the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate is obligated to decide a representation under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within three months as per Section 24(3).
Whether the court can issue a writ directing the magistrate to decide the pending representation.

Legislation cited

U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 24(3)

Subjects

writ petition
administrative law
time‑bound decision
U.P. Revenue Code
Section 24
representation
sub‑divisional magistrate

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 25484 of 2023

Toulan Gupta @ Umashankar Gupta
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rateesh Singh, Sanjay
Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, CSC

Court No. - 6
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the
record.

3. The basic relief sought by the petitioner in the present writ
petition is to direct the respondent No.2/Sub Divisional
Magistrate, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj to decide the
representation of the petitioner dated 16.05.2023 of the
petitioner under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006,
within stipulated period.

4. It is argued by the counsel for the petitioner that as per
provisions contained under sub-section (3) of Section 24 of the
U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, such kind of applications should be
decided within a time bound period. Sub section (3) of Section
24 reads as follows:-

"(3). Every proceeding under this section shall, as far as
possible, be concluded by the Sub-Divisional Officer
within three months from the date of the application.

5. It is further argued that though the aforesaid period has
already been lapsed but till date no final decision has been
taken in the matter, hence the present writ petition.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ
WRIC No. 25484 of 2023
2

petition is disposed of finally directing the respondent
No.2/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Handia, District
Prayagraj to decide the aforesaid case as per the provisions
contained under sub-section (3) of Section 24 of the U.P.
Revenue Code, 2006, unless there is no legal impediment.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

March 19, 2026
Swati

Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…