Allahabad High Court
SANJAY BHARTIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the representation had already been decided and the relief sought was consequently unavailable.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Bharti, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and others to consider and decide his representations dated 22.01.2026 and 04.06.2026 with a reasoned order. The respondents submitted instructions indicating that the representation had already been decided and the relief sought was therefore already granted. The Court examined the submissions and found no merit in ordering a fresh mandamus as the matter was concluded. It advised the petitioner that any grievance with the decision could be pursued in the appropriate forum. Consequently, the petition was consigned to the records.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel an authority to consider and decide a representation that has already been decided
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable after the representation has been acted upon
Subjects
- Article 226
- Writ of Mandamus
- Representation
- High Court of Allahabad
- Consignment to records
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35605 of 2026
Sanjay Bharti
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sharad Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, C.S.C.
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for following relief:
"(I). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondents to consider and decide the representations of petitioner dated 22.01.2026
and 04.06.2026 by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law
(Annexure No.- 2 and 3 to the writ petition)."
3. Sri Jitendra Ojha, learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 2 & 7 has
obtained instructions, which are taken on record and a copy of the same is
also served upon learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. As per the instructions, decision has already been taken upon the
representation of the petitioner and hence relief claimed for in the writ
petition has already stood granted.
5. Petitioner, if aggrieved by the decision taken by the authority
concerned, can approach appropriate forum, is so advised.
6. Subject to aforesaid liberty, this petition is consigned to records.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
September 16, 2026
Atmesh
Digitally signed by :-
ATMESH KESARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…