Allahabad High Court
LAL BAHADURversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Holding
The court held that the Tehsildar must decide the pending mutation proceeding expeditiously, within six weeks, and without unnecessary adjournments.
Summary
Petitioner Lal Bahadur filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Tehsildar (Judicial) of Powayan to decide a mutation case (No. 3339 of 2016) pending since 2016 under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner alleged undue delay and unnecessary adjournments, attaching the order sheet to show the case had not progressed expeditiously. The court examined the instruction from the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Shahjahanpur, which confirmed the prolonged pendency, but refrained from adjudicating the merits of the mutation dispute. Relying on the principle that public authorities must act within a reasonable time, the court issued a direction to the respondent Tehsildar to decide the matter within six weeks, after hearing the parties, and to avoid further adjournments. The order thus disposed of the writ petition by mandating prompt disposal of the pending revenue proceeding.
Issues considered
- Whether the Tehsildar's failure to decide the mutation case within a reasonable time warrants issuance of a writ of mandamus.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 34
Subjects
- mutation
- mandamus
- writ petition
- U.P. Revenue Code
- administrative delay
- public authority
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 27397 of 2026
Lal Bahadur
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Kumar Srivastava, Bhaju Ram
Prasad Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sher Bahadur Singh
Court No. - 37
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Mool Chand, learned Counsel holding brief of Mr. B.R
Prasad Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sher
Bahadur Singh, learned Counsel for Land Management Committee
and Mr. Shashi Kant Kushwaha, learned Standing Counsel for the
State respondents.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus
commanding and directing to respondent No. 2 to decide the Mutation
Case No. 3339 of 2016 (Computerized Case No. T20161261023339, (Lal
Bahadur Versus Ganga Devi), Under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code,
2006, pending before him very expeditiously without granting
unnecessary adjournments to either parties within stipulated period."
3. Instruction sent by Sub Divisional Officer Shahjahanpur is taken on
record.
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that mutation proceeding
initiated at the instance of petitioner is pending since 2016. He further
placed the order sheet of the pending proceeding in order to
demonstrate that matter is not proceeding expeditiously.
5. Instruction dated 25.8.2026 demonstrate that matter is pending
since 2016.
WRIC No. 27397 of 2026
2
6. Considering the facts mentioned in the instruction sent by Sub
Divisional Officer Shahjahanpur, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally
with a direction to respondent No.2, Tehsildar (Judicial), Tehsil
Powayan, District Shahjahanpur to consider and decide the
aforementioned proceeding in accordance with law expeditiously and
preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of
certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the
parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to
either of the parties.
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
September 11, 2026
Vandana Y.
Digitally signed by :-
VANDANA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…