Allahabad High Court
M/S BABOO LAL ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VINOD DIWAKAR
Holding
The High Court directed the Board of Revenue to decide the pending case within six months upon payment of one‑third of the deficient stamp duty.
Summary
The petitioners, M/s Baboo Lal Anil Kumar and another, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Board of Revenue, Prayagraj, to decide the pending case REV/2870 of 2018 (M/s Baboo Lal Anil Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Others) within a reasonable time. They alleged that the Board had not rendered any final decision despite the case being pending for several years. The Court examined whether a direction under Article 226 could be issued to compel the Board to act expeditiously. It held that the Board could be directed to decide the matter, subject to the petitioners depositing one‑third of the deficient stamp duty. Accordingly, the petition was disposed with an order directing the Board to decide the case within six months of producing a certified copy of the order, upon receipt of the stipulated stamp duty payment.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when a statutory authority fails to decide a pending case within a reasonable time?
- Can the High Court issue a mandamus directing the Board of Revenue to decide the case expeditiously?
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- Board of Revenue
- stamp duty
- expeditious disposal
- administrative law
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 36875 of 2026
M/S Baboo Lal Anil Kumar And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vijay Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.
1. Heard counsel for the petitioners, and learned Standing Counsel
representing the State-respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of a direction in
the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2, Board of
Revenue, Prayagraj to decide Case No. REV/2870 of 2018 titled M/s Baboo
Lal Anil Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Others, within stipulated
time.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aforesaid case has been
pending consideration before respondent no.2, but no final decision has been
made thereon till date. Therefore, a suitable direction be issued to respondent
no.2 to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously, within a stipulated time.
4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ
petition is finally disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2, the Board
of Revenue, Prayagraj, that upon the petitioner depositing 1/3rd of the
deficient stamp duty, Case No. REV/2870 of 2018 (M/s Baboo Lal Anil
Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Others) shall be decided
expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of production of a
certified copy of this order.
September 15, 2026
Shafique
(Vinod Diwakar,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SAFIKUR RAHAMAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…