Allahabad High Court

AMARNATH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: CHANDRA KUMAR RAI

Holding

The court held that the respondent’s inaction amounted to a breach of statutory duty and issued a mandamus directing the decision of the revenue case within two months.

Summary

The petitioners, Amarnath and five others, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Officer (respondent No.2) to decide a revenue case (Computerized Case No. T202616660108772/2026) concerning 1.9050 hectares of land in Musahi village. The petition alleged that the proceeding under Section 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, read with Rule 127 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, had been pending since January 2026 without expeditious action. The court examined the delay and the statutory duty to decide the case within a reasonable time. It held that the respondent had failed to comply with the statutory timeline and therefore ordered the respondent to decide the matter within two months of the certified copy of the order, after giving a proper hearing. The court also awarded costs to the petitioners and disposed of the writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether the Sub‑Divisional Officer has failed to decide the revenue proceeding within the period prescribed under Section 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Rule 127 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016.
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the respondent to decide the pending case within a specified time.

Legislation cited

U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 134
U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 127

Subjects

writ petition
mandamus
U.P. Revenue Code
administrative delay
land revenue
public law

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35357 of 2026

Amarnath And 5 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Tripathi, Shashank
Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pradeep Singh

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

1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri Dinesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the
State and Sri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.

2. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

(1) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus,
commanding the respondent No.2 to decide the Computerized Case
No.T202616660108772/2026, Amarnath Vs. Ram Pyare and others,
under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 read with Rule 127 of
U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 in respect of arazi No.103 area 1.9050
hectare situated in Village-Musahi, Pargana-Badahar, Tehsil-
Robertsganj, District-Sonbhadra, within stipulated period, specified by
this Hon'ble Court.

(II) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(III) Award the cost of present writ petition in favour of the Petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the proceeding
initiated at the instance of the petitioner under Section 134 of the U.P.
Revenue Code, 2006 is pending before the respondent no. 2-Sub-
Divisional Officer, since January, 2026. He placed the order sheet of the
pending proceeding in order to demonstrate that matter is not proceeding
WRIC No. 35357 of 2026
2

expeditiously.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition
is disposed of directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the aforementioned
proceeding within a period of two months from the date of production of
a certified copy of this order, after affording proper opportunity of hearing
to the parties.

(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
September 8, 2026
Neetu

Digitally signed by :-
NEETU SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…