Allahabad High Court
SHANKAR LALversusSUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, TEHSIL- SORAON AND 11 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Holding
The Court directed the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate to decide the restoration application within six weeks, without expressing any opinion on its merits.
Summary
The petitioner, Shankar Lal, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate (SDM) of Soraon to decide a pending restoration application filed on 4 February 2022. The restoration application pertained to an earlier case (Computer case No. T202002030308201 of 2019) that had been finally decided on 8 December 2021. The petitioner argued that the SDM had unduly delayed the restoration proceedings and requested an expeditious disposal within a fixed time‑frame. The Court, without delving into the merits of the restoration application, directed the SDM to hear the parties and decide the matter within six weeks of receiving the certified copy of the order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of after issuing the direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate should be directed to decide the pending restoration application expeditiously.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the SDM to adhere to a specific time‑frame for disposal.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 24
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- restoration application
- U.P. Revenue Code
- expeditious disposal
- Sub‑Divisional Magistrate
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 28057 of 2026
Shankar Lal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Soraon And 11
Others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bindeshwari Prasad, Raghvendra
Tripathi, Shiv Poojan Patel
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C.
Court No. - 37
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Certified copy of the order sheet of the restoration case placed before
the Court is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Satyendra Bhushan
Dubey, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Azad
Rai, leaned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.
3. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief:
"Issue a writ order direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to
the respondents specifically respondent No.1 to decide the case of the present
petitioner bearing Computer case No. T202002030308201 of 2019 (Shankar Lal Vs.
State and others), under section 24 of UP. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the
learned Sub-Divisional Telisal-Soraon, District Prayagraj."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the proceeding under
Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 initiated at the instance of
petitioner was decided finally vide order dated 8.12.2021. He further
submitted that the restoration application dated 4.2.2022 filed on behalf of
private respondent no.5 for setting aside the order dated 8.1.2021 is
pending before respondent no.1/ Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Soraon,
Prayagraj as Case No.RST/15086/2026, Computerized Case
No.T202602030315086 (Shankar Lal vs. State and others). He further
submitted that appropriate direction be issued for expeditious disposal of
WRIC No. 28057 of 2026
2
the aforementioned restoration case within time bound period.
5. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and keeping in
view of the facts and circumstances, respondent no.1 is directed to decide
the aforementioned restoration application dated 4.2.2022 {Case
No.RST/15086/2026, Computerized Case No.T202602030315086
(Shankar Lal vs. State and others)} considering the delay condondation
matter first affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties,
expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of
production of certified copy of this order before him.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is finally disposed of.
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
September 9, 2026
Rameez
Digitally signed by :-
RAMEEZ AHMED
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…