Hussain Majeed Rasheed v. Union Of India & ORS.
$~98 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 365/2026 HUSSAIN MAJEED RASHEED .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Saeed Masroor, Advs.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, CGSC with Ms. Usha Jamnal, Ms.
Nyasa Sharma and Mr. Ankit Khatri, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
O R D E R
% 12.01.2026 1.
The petitioner seeks for the following reliefs: "A) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding Respondent No. 2 to forthwith process, consider and grant extension of the petitioner's Business Visa B-1 Multiple Entry for a further period of one year, upon due verification of the accompanying documents, positively by 14.01.2026 or within 48 hours of the receipt of the order (passed by this Hon'ble Court), whichever is earlier, without insisting on any conditions save those statutorily mandated; and/or B) Issue a writ of Prohibition restraining the Respondents from initiating any coercive action, overstay proceedings, penalties, deporting or blacklisting against the petitioner during the pendency of this petition and until disposal of the visa extension application as directed; and/or" the facts, however, indicate that the petitioner was very much aware about the expiry of his viza on 14.01.2026.
2.
The petitioner seems to have filed an application for extension of his Business Visa B-1 only on 29.12.2025, and on 07.01.2026, he has The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/01/2026 at 13:39:15
approached the Court seeking expeditious disposal of his application. 3.
On advance instructions, learned counsel appearing for the respondents points out that even on 30.12.2025 and 08.01.2026, some information was sought from the petitioner. It, thus, appears that the respondent authorities are already considering the petitioner's application. 4.
Therefore, the Court does not find it appropriate to issue any mandatory direction to decide the application within a particular period of time. If the petitioner were to seek such a direction, he should have filed the application much earlier. Filing of the application before the authority and seeking its disposal without granting enough time to the concerned authority to consider it, is wholly unwarranted.
5.
Under these circumstances, the petition stands disposed of. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J JANUARY 12, 2026/P/MJ The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/01/2026 at 13:39:15