Allahabad High Court
TRILOKINATH MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that it can issue a mandamus directing the respondent to decide the pending representation expeditiously.
Summary
Petitioner Trilokinath Mishra filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the second respondent, a government authority, to decide his representation dated 25 July 2026. The petitioner alleged undue delay in the decision of his representation. The State's standing counsel raised no objection to the issuance of such a direction. The Court examined whether it could exercise its writ jurisdiction to compel the respondent to act expeditiously in accordance with law. Finding no impediment, the Court ordered the respondent to decide the pending representation within two months of the certified copy of the order. The petition was consequently disposed with the mandated direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can, under Article 226, issue a mandamus directing the respondent to decide a pending representation within a specified time.
Subjects
- Article 226
- Writ jurisdiction
- Mandamus
- Expeditious decision
- Representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 37108 of 2026
Trilokinath Mishra
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anoop Bhaiya Lal Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard Sri Anoop Bhaiya Lal Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for the following relief:
"(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
Respondent no. 2 to decide representation of the petitioner dated 25.07.2026 which is
pending before Respondent no. 2 within a short period which may be fixed by this
Hon'ble Court."
3. Learned Standing Counsel states that he does not have any objection in
the event a direction is issued to the respondent No.- 2 to decide the
pending representation of the petitioner in accordance with law.
4. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with a direction to
the respondent No.- 2 to consider and decide the pending application/
representation of the petitioner dated 25th July, 2026 strictly in
accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of
this order.
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
September 30, 2026
Atmesh
Digitally signed by :-
ATMESH KESARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…