Allahabad High Court
WRIC/35548/2026 of SHYAM SUNDER SHARMA Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS on 8 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35548 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the record. 2. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35548 of 2026
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the record.
2. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner inter-alia with the prayer to direct the respondent no.2-Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Ghaziabad, District Ghaziabad to decide the case bearing Case No. 24325 of 2025, Computerized Case No. T202511280124325 (Shyam Sunder Sharma Versus Divanshu Sharma and another) under Section 23 of U.P. Maintenance and Welfare Act, 2007, pending in the court of respondent no.2, since 29.10.2025 within stipulated period of time.
3. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the opposite party to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case the opposite party feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek modification/Variation of the order is being kept reserved.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that matter is pending since 2025 and considerable time has already been lapsed but till date no final decision has been taken in the matter.
5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents submits that competent authority will take appropriate decision in the matter, expeditiously. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Shukla, Surendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Shyam Sunder Sharma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the court concerned to decide the aforesaid case, expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, unless there is no legal impediment.
September 9, 2026 T.S. WRIC No. 35548 of 2026 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad