Ravindra Patel vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ravindra Patel vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No. 2-Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division, District Varanasi to consider and decide Revision No. 1569 of 2025 under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 expeditiously, preferably within six months from production of a certified copy of the order, after ensuring service and opportunity of hearing, without unnecessary adjournments, provided there is no legal impediment.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue commanding Respondent No. 2/Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division, District Varanasi to decide Revision No. 1569 of 2025 under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 within a stipulated period

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No. 2-Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division, District Varanasi to consider and decide the pending revision.

Ratio / Principle

The Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division shall decide the revision in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, after ensuring service upon all opposite parties and giving opportunity of hearing, without granting unnecessary adjournments, provided there is no other legal impediment.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) disposed of a writ petition in which the petitioner sought a mandamus commanding the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division to decide Revision No. 1569 of 2025 (Ravindra Patel and others vs. Nazma Bano and Others) under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, pending since 17.03.2025 with several dates fixed but undecided. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court directed the revisional authority to decide the revision in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, after ensuring service upon all opposite parties and giving opportunity of hearing, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party, and subject to there being no other legal impediment.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 14702 of 2026

Ravindra Patel

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 6 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ajeet Singh, Randhir Jain, Sandeep Kumar Keshari
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.

Court No. - 36

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record.

The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to commanding the Respondent No. 2/Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division, District Varanasi to decide the Revision No. 1569 of 2025 (Computerized Case No. C202514000001569) (Ravindra Patel and others vs. Nazma Bano and Others) under Section 210 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, within stipulated period of time as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court."

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the aforesaid revision is pending since 17.03.2025. It is further contended that several dates have been fixed but the same has not been decided yet. He prayed that the same may be decided, expeditiously.

No useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No. 2-Additional Commissioner (Administration), Varanasi Division, District Varanasi to consider and

WRIC No. 14702 of 2026

2

decide the aforementioned revision, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after ensuring service upon all the opposite parties and giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment.

(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)

April 20, 2026 Kirti

Digitally signed by :- SMT KIRTI MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad