Disposed¶19

Nanhke v. State of U.P. Thru. Collector, Unnao and Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2025/11796/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious disposal; time-bound direction; six weeks; stay application; application for interim relief; suit for division of land; Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao; ad-interim relief; appellate authority; no unnecessary adjournments; writ petition disposed; WRIT - C No. 11796 of 2025; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Alok Mathur, J.; December 4, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao to decide the petitioner's application for interim relief in the suit for division of land within six weeks after service of notice on the respondents, in accordance with law; failing which the petitioner may press ad-interim relief before the appellate authority. ¶19

Nanhke Vs State of U.P. Thru. Collector, Unnao and Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao should be directed to decide the petitioner's stay application / application for interim relief in the pending suit for division of land expeditiously.

¶13

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits, respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao is directed to decide the petitioner's application for interim relief in the suit for division of land within a period of six weeks after service of notice on the respondents, in accordance with law.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

In case the application for interim relief cannot be decided, it shall be open to the petitioner to press ad-interim relief, which the appellate authority shall consider and decide in accordance with law.

¶15

Key takeaways

The parties to the case shall cooperate in expeditious disposal, shall not seek unnecessary adjournments, and no such adjournment shall be granted by the court concerned except in exceptional circumstances.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Alok Mathur, J.), disposed of Writ - C No. 11796 of 2025 (Nanhke v. State of U.P. Thru. Collector, Unnao and others). The petitioner's counsel confined the prayer to a direction for expeditious decision of the stay application filed in a suit for division of land. Without entering into the merits, the Court directed respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao to decide the application for interim relief within six weeks after service of notice on the respondents, in accordance with law; if it could not be so decided, the petitioner was left free to press ad-interim relief before the appellate authority. The parties were directed to cooperate in expeditious disposal and not to seek unnecessary adjournments, and none were to be granted except in exceptional circumstances.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 11796 of 2025

Nanhke

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Unnao And Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dheerendra Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dilip Kumar Pandey

¶9

Court No. - 5

¶10

HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Standing counsel for the State - respondents while notice on behalf of respondent No.3 has been accepted by Sri Dileep Kumar Pandey.

¶12

In view of the proposed order, notice to private respondent is dispense with.

¶13

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer for a direction to respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao to decide the stay application filed in suit for division of land, expeditiously.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be sufficiently met in case respondent no.2 considers and decides the aforesaid case in the time bound manner, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits, respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, District Unnao is directed to decide application for interim relief preferred by the petitioner in suit for division of land within a period of six weeks after service of notice on the respondents in accordance with law and in case the application for interim relief cannot be decided, it shall be open for the petitioner to press ad-interim relief which the appellate authority shall consider and decide, in accordance with law.

¶16

It is further directed that the parties to the case shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, neither any such adjournment shall be granted by the Court concerned, except in exceptional circumstances.

¶17

WRIC No. 11796 of 2025

¶18

¶19