Allahabad High Court
BINAY KUMAR MISHRAversusADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE (FINANCE & REVENUE) AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The district administration must comply with the order dated 03.06.2024 to grant possession of the property to the petitioner, unless a legal impediment exists.
Summary
Petitioner Binay Kumar Mishra filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue) and others to hand over physical possession of a specific immovable property in Varanasi, pursuant to an order dated 03.06.2024 issued by Respondent No.1. The respondents argued that the bank had repeatedly requested the district administration to act on the order, but no action had been taken. The Court, after hearing counsel and with the parties' consent, found no legal impediment to compliance and ordered the district administration to implement the 03.06.2024 order expeditiously. The petition was disposed with a direction to the district administration to comply with the earlier order. The judgment also allowed any aggrieved party to move a recall application within one month.
Issues considered
- Whether the district administration is legally bound to comply with the order dated 03.06.2024 directing possession of the property to the petitioner
- Whether a writ of mandamus is appropriate to enforce the compliance
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- possession
- district administration
- order compliance
- property
- civil procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35428 of 2026
Binay Kumar Mishra
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Additional District Magistrate (Finance &
Revenue) And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sudhanshu Mishra, Suresh Chandra
Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anadi Krishna Narayana, C.S.C.
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State-respondents.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose
would be served by putting the respondent to notice and keeping this
petition pending before this Court. However, in case, any of the parties is
aggrieved with this order, he has liberty to move a recall application
within one month from today.
3. Present petition has been filed, inter-alia, with the following prayer:-
"1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents particularly the Respondent No. 2
to provide the physical possession of immovable property i.e.
all part and parcel of Property bearing Araji No. 288, ad-
measuring area 291.08 Sq. Mtr. situated at Mauja Khajuhi,
Ward Sarnath, Parganas Shivpur, Tehsil and District Varanasi
to the petitioner in pursuance to order dated 03.06.2024 passed
by the Respondent No. 1 within a stipulated period fixed by
this Hon'ble Court."
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 that time
and again the Bank authorities have requested to the District
Administration to comply with the order dated 03.06.2024 passed by the
WRIC No. 35428 of 2026
2
respondent no. 1 but till date, no action has been taken by the District
Administration.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and with the consent of the
parties, the instant petition is disposed of with direction to the District
Administration to comply with the order dated 03.06.2024 passed by the
respondent no. 1 in its letter and spirit, expeditiously, unless there is no
legal impediment.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
September 8, 2026
gp
Digitally signed by :-
GANESH PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…