Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ADITYA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court ordered the respondent to consolidate the pending suit proceedings and decide them within six months, without granting unnecessary adjournments.

Summary

Petitioners Aditya Singh and another filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Additional Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Ghazipur, to consolidate several pending cases (Nos. 3112‑3117 and 3102 of 2026) filed under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, and to decide them together within a stipulated period. The petitioners argued that the suit for division of holding had been pending since February 2026 without expeditious progress. The Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, did not opine on the merits but directed the respondent to consider and dispose of the pending suit proceedings expeditiously, preferably within six months of the certified copy of the order, after giving a hearing and without unnecessary adjournments. The order thus aims to ensure speedy resolution of the consolidated matters. The petition was disposed with the said direction.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the consolidation and expeditious disposal of pending suit proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • mandamus
  • consolidation of cases
  • expeditious disposal
  • U.P. Revenue Code
  • Section 116
  • administrative law

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                        WRIT - C No. - 32205 of 2026

Aditya Singh And Another
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

State Of U.P. And 7 Others
                                                          .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)         : Kamlesh Shrama
Counsel for Respondent(s)         : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.

Court No. - 37
                 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.

1. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary
correction in the array of the parties in the writ petition during course
of the day.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bhupendra Kumar
Tripathi, learned Counsel for Gaon Sabha and Mr. Nand Lal Maurya,
learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

3. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-

" Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondent no.2 to consolidate the Case No. 3113 of 2026 "Computer
Case No. T202614291003113" (Aditya Singh & another Vs. Dharmpal
Singh and others), Case No. 3114 of 2026 "Computer Case No.
T202614291003114" (Aditya Singh & another Vs. Dharmpal Singh and
others), Case 3117 Case No. No. 3115 of 2026 "Computer
T202614291003115" (Aditya Singh & another Vs. Dharmpal Singh and
others), Case No. 3116 of 2026 "Computer Case No.
T202614291003116" (Aditya Singh & another Vs. Dharmpal Singh and
others), Case No. of 2026 "Computer Case No. T202614291003117"
(Aditya Singh & another Vs. Dharmpal Singh and others), Case No.
3102 of 2026 "Computer Case No. T202614291003102" (Aditya Singh
& another Vs. Dharmpal Singh and others) u/s 116 of U.P. Revenue
Code 2006 pending before Sub Divisional Officer Sadar District
Ghazipur and decide together within stipulated period prescribed bed by
this Hon'ble Court."
                                                                                         WRIC No. 32205 of 2026
                                                                  2


                                    4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that suit for division of holding
                                    (particular of the same as mentioned in the prayer clause of the writ
                                    petition) are pending at present before respondent no.2, Additional
                                    Sub Divisional Officer Sadar Ghazipur since February 2026. He
                                    further placed the order sheet of the pending proceeding in order to
                                    demonstrate that matter is not proceeding expeditiously.

                                    5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without
                                    expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition
                                    stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No.2,
                                    Additional Sub Divisional Officer Sadar Ghazipur to consider and
                                    decide the aforementioned suit proceedings in accordance with law
                                    expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months 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 17, 2026
                                    Vandana Y.




Digitally signed by :-
VANDANA YADAV
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.