Allahabad High Court
SHALINI CHAURASIYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- GARIMA PRASHAD
Holding
The Court directed the Naib Tehsildar to dispose of the pending suit within three months, thereby granting the mandamus relief.
Summary
Petitioner Shalini Chaurasiya filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Naib Tehsildar (respondent No.2) to decide a pending revenue suit (Suit No. 12618/2025) filed in August 2025 under Section 34 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner argued that despite completion of pleadings, no final order had been passed. The State's standing counsel raised no objection to the direction. The Court held that the respondent must dispose of the pending suit within three months of the certified copy of the order, without unnecessary adjournments, and recorded that any adjournment must be justified. Consequently, the petition was disposed with the specific direction to the respondent.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued under Article 226 to compel a revenue officer to decide a pending suit under Section 34 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
- Whether the court can impose a time‑bound deadline for disposal of the pending suit.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 34
Subjects
- Article 226
- mandamus
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Section 34
- time‑bound disposal
- writ petition
- Revenue officer
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 33976 of 2026
Shalini Chaurasiya
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Lakshman Tripathi, Sanat Kumar
Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing
Counsel for the State.
2. By means of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for the following relief:
"Issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondent no. 2 to decide the Suit No. 12618/2025 Computerized Suit No.
T202514700212618 (Shalini Chaurasiya Vs JaiPrakash Yadav) Under
Section 34 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code-2006 and pass an appropriate
and reasoned order within an stipulated time given by this Hon'ble Court."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed
the aforesaid petition seeking mutation in the month of August, 2025
before the respondent No.2, however, the same is pending. It is further
submitted that contesting respondents have filed their reply, however
despite completion of pleadings, no final decision has been taken by the
respondent No.2. He, therefore, prays that the respondent No.2 may be
directed to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously in a time bound
manner.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the State has no objection if the
respondent No.2 is directed to decide the aforesaid case in accordance
with law.
5. In view thereof, this petition stands disposed of with a direction to
respondent no.2/Naib Tehsildar, Athgavan Zone, Varansi, Tehsil Pindra,
District Varanasi to dispose of the aforesaid pending case within a period
WRIC No. 33976 of 2026
2
of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this
order, in accordance with law after hearing all the parties concerned. It is
made clear that no unnecessary adjournment shall be granted to either of
the parties. In the event the adjournment is considered necessary and is
granted, sufficient reasons must be recorded.
(Garima Prashad,J.)
September 8, 2026
Kuldeep
Digitally signed by :-
KULDEEP SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…