#mandamus

The Jharkhand High Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the state to extend the retirement age of AYUSH Medical Officers from 65 to 67 years, aligning them with allopathic doctors under Article 14. The court ordered notification within four months, preventing the petitioner's imminent superannuation at 65 and granting consequential benefits.

Telangana HC ordered revenue authorities to delete land entries based on a Waqf Gazette set aside by the court, holding their retention violates Article 300A and binds the State and Waqf Board to comply, shielding landowners from wrongful Wakf classifications.

Calcutta HC directed SAIL to re-invite the MSME petitioner, allowing it to match the lowest-bidder’s price because the bid fell within the 15 % band mandated by the 2012 MSE purchase-preference policy. The court held that not ticking the MSME option on GeM does not defeat eligibility, and a mandamus can compel compliance. The ruling safeguards registered MSMEs in public procurement, ensuring they can compete even if the portal preference box is missed.

A two-year unjustified hold on a No-Objection Certificate was deemed malice in law, breaching Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21, and the petition was dismissed after the NOC was finally granted. This ruling warns administrative authorities that arbitrary delays can be struck down as unconstitutional, affecting all applicants seeking statutory clearances.

Allahabad HC directs Lucknow Police Commissioner to initiate departmental inquiry against officers harassing a petitioner despite no FIR, reinforcing Article 21 protections. The ruling underscores accountability for extralegal police conduct and mandates safeguards against victimization.

Allahabad HC disposed of a mandamus petition seeking expeditious investigation in Case Crime No. 0496/2026, directing authorities to complete probe under BNS sections 115(2), 118(2), 125, 333, 351(3), 109(1), 3(5) without delay. The court granted liberty to approach the Magistrate if needed, citing Sakiri Vasu (2008) 2 SCC 409.

Allahabad HC directs District Magistrate to remove illegal encroachment within one week, holding four-year inaction by authorities violates rule of law and finality of SDM order under Section 133 CrPC. The ruling underscores executive accountability in public pathway restoration.

Kerala High Court directed the MSME Facilitation Council to dispose of a pending claim petition within three months after conciliation proceedings failed. The ruling underscores the enforceability of mandamus writs against statutory bodies for timely adjudication under the MSME Act.

The Allahabad High Court has mandated that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority must conclude registration proceedings initiated via notice under Section 59 of RERA, 2016, within three months of its production. This enforces a strict statutory deadline, protecting homebuyers from indefinite delays and reinforcing RERA’s obligation to act with urgency, not discretion.

The Allahabad High Court has directed the Tehsildar to decide pending encroachment cases on revenue-recorded pond land within three months, reinforcing that public utility land held in trust cannot be lawfully occupied. This ruling strengthens accountability for local revenue authorities and affirms that encroachments on community water bodies violate the Public Trust Doctrine, affecting thousands of citizens reliant on such lands for ecological and livelihood security.

Karnataka High Court reinforces that municipal authorities must comply with judicial orders under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, directing immediate shop allotment to street vendors within 30 days. Failure to adhere to court directives constitutes contempt and violates the rule of law, setting a precedent for enforcing judicial compliance in administrative matters.

Andhra Pradesh High Court directs authorities to decide on a show-cause notice within one week, holding that undue delay in adjudicating seized perishable agricultural stock under the Seeds Act, 1966, amounts to a violation of natural justice and constitutional rights. The ruling mandates prompt disposal of such cases to prevent irreparable loss to stakeholders.

Allahabad High Court reinforces that writ courts cannot intervene in pending partition disputes under the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950, by directing specific outcomes. The ruling mandates the Board of Revenue to decide revisions within four months, upholding statutory adjudication over judicial preemption in property disputes.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that authorities must dispose of requests for public assembly permissions within two days, emphasizing that undue delays violate constitutional rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), and 21. The judgment reinforces the state's obligation to facilitate, not obstruct, democratic dissent through timely administrative action.

Andhra Pradesh High Court directs the state to provisionally include AICTE-approved diploma courses in 2026-27 admissions counseling, pending final NOC decision. The ruling underscores administrative delays violate constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g), mandating expeditious processing to protect educational institutions and students from irreparable harm.