SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 30392

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
Rasheed U.P. – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 17602 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C.M.Mohammed Iquabal
For the Respondents: Deepa V

The High Court may issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct an appellate authority to dispose of a pending statutory appeal within a fixed time frame, provided principles of natural justice are observed.

Headnote:The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging an administrative order and seeking a direction to the appellate authority to dispose of a pending appeal. The primary issue was the delay in the disposal of an appeal filed against an order passed by a revenue official. The court, without adjudicating the merits, directed the appellate authority to expedite the hearing and decision-making process. The core issue before the court was whether the appellate authority could be mandated to dispose of the pending appeal within a specified time frame. The ratio decidendi established is that where an appeal is pending before a statutory authority, the court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, may direct the authority to decide the matter within a prescribed period, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice by affording the petitioner a hearing. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to expedite the appeal process.

Table of Content
1. direction for time-bound disposal of administrative appeals. (Para 1 , 2 , 4)

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

" a) Call for the records leading up to Ext.P3 order and quash the same by issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction. b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 appeal preferred against Ext.P3 order, within a time stipulated by this Hon’ble Court.

c) Pass an order dispensing with the production of English translation of vernacular document at the time of filing of Writ Petition.

d) Pass any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to issue and the petitioner may pray from time to time."

[SIC]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 appeal within a time frame. 3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader.

4. After hearing both sides, I think that prayer can be allowed.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. The 1st respondent is directed to consider Ext.P4 and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top