WRIC/11538/2026 of LAL BAHADUR Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 11538 of 2026 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. Perused the material available on record. 2. The instant writ petition has been instituted seeking issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to consider and decide the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner dated 31.01.2026 under Rule 6-Ka of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Kutumb Register Anurakshan) Niyamawali, 1970, within a stipulated time frame. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no.4 has fraudulently procured entries in the Parivar Register by incorporating forged and fabricated particulars, showing his parentage as Nachakau and Smt. Phoolkali, whereas in fact he is the son of Ramjeet s/o Pachai Patel and Smt. Ramsakhi. It is contended that such manipulation in the Parivar Register has serious consequences and affects the rights of the petitioner. 4. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a statutory appeal on 31.01.2026 before respondent no.2, who, vide order, directed respondent no.3 to conduct an inquiry and submit a report within a period of one week. However, despite lapse of considerable time, the said inquiry report has not been submitted till date, resulting in inordinate delay in disposal of the appeal, which has remained pending for more than six weeks. It is thus urged that the inaction on the part of respondent no.3 has frustrated the appellate proceedings and warrants interference by this Court. 5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is under grave threat Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Chand Umrao Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Lal Bahadur .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) and has allegedly been subjected to a firearm assault by the private respondent, and is presently undergoing treatment at Swaroop Rani Hospital, Prayagraj. On account of such exigent circumstances, it is prayed that appropriate directions be issued to ensure expeditious conclusion of the proceedings so as to prevent further prejudice to the petitioner. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.4 submits that the private respondent has already appeared and is participating in the proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (respondent no.2), and undertakes to cooperate in early disposal of the matter. 7. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the controversy, this Court finds that the grievance of the petitioner is confined to expeditious disposal of the statutory appeal, which is pending consideration before the respondent no.2. The present writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Karchana, District Prayagraj to decide the petitioner's appeal, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties. April 20, 2026 A. Tripathi WRIC No. 11538 of 2026 2 (Vinod Diwakar,J.) Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad