Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

NARVADA PRASAD PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The court directed respondent No.3 to decide the application dated 07‑08‑2025 within three months by passing a reasoned order.

Summary

In Writ No. 28910 of 2026, petitioner Narvada Prasad Pandey filed a petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking a direction to respondent No.3 to decide an application dated 07‑08‑2025. The petitioner’s counsel, Vishal Tandon, specifically prayed for a time‑bound disposal of that application. The respondents, represented by Azad Rai, did not contest the prayer. The court examined whether it could compel a public authority to adjudicate an application within a stipulated period. Finding no legal impediment, the court ordered respondent No.3 to pass a reasoned order within three months. Accordingly, the petition was disposed with the said direction.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can direct a public authority to decide an application within a specified time frame

Subjects

  • Writ petition
  • Mandamus
  • Time‑bound order
  • Public authority
  • Expeditious disposal

Judgment

                                             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                           WRIT - C No. - 28910 of 2026

                                    Narvada Prasad Pandey
                                                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                      Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 5 Others
                                                                                             .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)                    :   Vishal Tandon
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)                    :   Azad Rai, C.S.C.

                                    Court No. - 5
                                                         HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.

                                    1. Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
                                    Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Azad Rai, learned
                                    counsel for the respondent no. 5.

                                    2. Pursuant to earlier order passed in the petition, learned Standing
                                    Counsel has furnished a detail instructions dated 31.08.2026, the same are
                                    taken on record.

                                    3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner presses only
                                    prayer no. 2, wherein an application dated 07.08.2025 may be directed to
                                    be decided in a time bound manner by the respondent no. 3.

                                    4. Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the same.

                                    5. In such view of the matter, the instant petition is disposed of with
                                    direction to the respondent no. 3 to decide the application dated
                                    07.08.2025 filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a
                                    period of three months, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, subject
                                    to there being any legal impediment.



                                                                                             (Vivek Saran,J.)
                                    September 23, 2026
                                    gp




Digitally signed by :-
GANESH PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.