The petitioner sought quashing of rejection and appointment as a driver. The single judge observed the petition was likely infructuous due to efflux of time and the petitioner was no longer interested, leading to dismissal.
Dismissal of the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 13
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 49263 of 2006
Petitioner :- Mohd. Jakir Respondent :- Union Of India And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nisaruddin,Moeez Uddin Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Ajay Kumar,N.C.Tripathi
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
List is being revised. Nobody is present on behalf of the petitioner to press the present writ petition. Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner dated 21.07.2006 (Annexure No.5 to this writ petition).
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to reconsider the candidature of the petitioner and to appoint the petitioner as driver after completing other formalities."
I have examined the order impugned, pleadings and grounds raised in the writ petition and have perused the records. The writ petition is of the year 2006 and it appears that either writ petition is rendered infructuous due to efflux of time or petitioner is no more interested in pursuing the writ petition.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 24.5.2018 Atmesh
Mohd. Jakir
Union Of India
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
