Allahabad High Court
DEEPAK YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the Sub‑Registrar to decide the petitioner’s representation within six weeks, without adjudicating the merits of the registration claim.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Yadav, filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the Sub‑Registrar of Bareilly to register a will deed dated 22‑07‑2021 and to decide pending applications filed on 05‑12‑2023 and 24‑12‑2025. The petitioner alleged that despite filing a representation on 24‑12‑2025, no decision had been taken. The Court examined the petition and, without reaching the merits of the registration issue, ordered the Sub‑Registrar to decide the representation within six weeks of the certified copy of the order. The Court clarified that it was not adjudicating the substantive rights concerning the will deed. The order was signed by Judges Garima Prashad and Neeraj Tiwari and dated 19‑March‑2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the Sub‑Registrar is obligated to register the will deed dated 22‑07‑2021 in favour of the petitioner.
- Whether the Sub‑Registrar should be directed to decide the pending applications dated 05‑12‑2023 and 24‑12‑2025.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- registration of will deed
- sub‑registrar
- administrative delay
- procedural order
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 4015 of 2026
Deepak Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bal Krishna Yadav, Neeraj Chandra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel
for State-respondents.
2. Present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"A). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding and directing to respondent No.3/Sub-Registrar, District-
Bareilly to registered the will deed dated 22.07.2021 executed by Late
Smt. Heera Kali in favour of the petitioner.
B). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding and directing to the Sub-Registrar, District-
Bareilly/respondent no.3 to consider and decide the application dated
05.12.2023 & 24.12.2025 moved by the petitioner which is still pending
before them till date."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for redressal of his
grievance, petitioner has filed representation dated 24.12.2025 before
respondent No. 3/Sub-Registrar, District- Bareilly, but till date no
decision has been taken. Lastly, it is submitted that a direction may be
issued to respondent No. 3 to decide the aforesaid representation within a
stipulated time, for which learned standing counsel has no objection.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is
disposed of directing respondent No. 3 to decide the representation of the
WRIC No. 4015 of 2026
2
petitioner dated 24.12.2025 in accordance with law maximum within
period of six weeks from the date of submission of certified copy of this
order.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the case on merits. It
is upon respondent No.3/Sub-Registrar, District- Bareilly to pass order
after considering the relevant Rules as well as facts of the case.
(Garima Prashad,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
March 19, 2026
Sachin Mishra
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…