Allahabad High Court
RAJAN SADANAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the District Magistrate to decide the matter expeditiously within four weeks, thereby granting the relief sought in the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Magistrate of Gautam Budh Nagar to enforce a recovery certificate dated 22‑08‑2025, issued under section 40 of the Act, and to recover Rs.14,39,562.33 plus interest from the promoter. The petitioner alleged that despite the certificate, the District Magistrate had taken no action. The respondents argued that the Magistrate would decide the matter expeditiously. After hearing both sides and reviewing the record, the Court ordered the District Magistrate to take a decision in accordance with law as soon as possible, preferably within four weeks of the order, unless a legal impediment exists. The petition was therefore disposed, with the Court reserving the right of any aggrieved party to seek modification of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing a District Magistrate to enforce a recovery certificate issued under section 40 of the Act.
- Whether the Court can pass such an order without issuing notice to the respondents.
Legislation cited
- the Act — s. 40
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- recovery certificate
- District Magistrate
- section 40
- expeditious decision
- civil procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 39971 of 2026
Rajan Sadana
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akashi Agrawal
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohd. Afzal
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for
respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Sri Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for
respondent No.4.
2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following
prayer:-
(i). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus
directing the Respondent No. 2 (District Magistrate, Gautam
Buddh Nagar) to ensure the recovery of Rs.14,39,562.33/along
with further interests, from the Respondent No. 3 (Promoter) in
compliance of the Recovery Certificate dated 22.08.2025
(Annexure No. 3) issued under section 40 of the Act in
Complaint No. NCR144/10/0068/2019 within a stipulated
period;
3. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose
would be served by putting the respondent/respondents to notice and
keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case
respondent/respondents feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek
modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite the
recovery certificate dated 22.08.2025 issued by the respondent No.4, no
action has been taken by the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Gautam
WRIC No. 39971 of 2026
2
Budh Nagar.
5. On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that
respondent No.2 will take a decision in the matter expeditiously.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is
disposed of directing the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Gautam
Budh Nagar to take a decision in the matter strictly in accordance with
law most expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from
the date of production of certified copy of this order unless there is no
legal impediment.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
October 1, 2026
saqlain
Digitally signed by :-
SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…