HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 9449 of 2026 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J. 1. Dr. Rajeshwar Tripathi, learned advocate, Chief Standing Counsel, appears on behalf of State and with reference to prayer (II) submits, the writ petition be disposed of with direction upon respondent no. 2 (the Commissioner) to expeditiously disposed of the stay application pending before him. Mr. Shrish Chandra, learned advocate appearing for petitioner draws attention to prayer (II). Said prayers are reproduced below. "(I) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondent No. 3 to suspend the effect and operation of the order dated 19.12.2025 until pendency of the stay application in the appeal filed before respondent no. 2. (II) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondent no. 2 to expeditiously dispose the stay application pending before learned Court of Commissioner Jhansi. " 2. On moving the writ petition we had recorded submissions made on behalf of petitioner. Paragraph-1 from order dated 15th April, 2026 is reproduced below. "1. Mr. Shrish Chandra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, initially there was allegation that his client had unauthorisedly obtained sand from districts Fatehpur and Mahoba. Consequently, his client was restrained from dealing with disclosed Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bobby Mishra, Faizan Siddiqui, Rishabh Kesarwani, Shiva Pandey, Shrish Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sarmast Khan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) amount of stored sand less the amount alleged to have been imported. There was first inspection made. The report alleged discrepancy between the declared and actual quantities. On his client's protest there was a second inspection made. The report said that the disclosed and actual quantities were same. However, by impugned order dated 19th December, 2025, respondent no.3 (the District Magistrate) penalized his client. His client applied for stay. The writ petition has been filed for passing restraint order since the stay application remains pending." State sought for adjournment on 22nd April, 2026. It appears from order made that day, on petitioner having opposed adjournment was granted as peremptory. Today contention of State is there be direction for expeditious disposal of petitioner's stay application. In the circumstances there will be order in terms of above prayers (I) (II). 3. The writ petition is disposed of. May 6, 2026 Shiraz WRIC No. 9449 of 2026 2 (Arindam Sinha,J.) (Satya Veer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIRAZ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad