The court dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear and had lost interest in pursuing the case regarding a suspension order.
Petition dismissed for want of prosecution; interim order vacated.
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. - 43
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 150 of 2014
Petitioner :- Parshuram Aarya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Kumar Singh,Basant Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
None for the parties even when the list is revised.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order of suspension dated 27.11.2013 passed by respondent no.4.
This order of suspension has been passed in contemplation of a departmental enquiry as is apparent from the order of suspension, and such order of suspension is appellable.
Looking to the fact that petitioner is not appearing to press this petition and case has been adjourned from time to time on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that with the efflux of time, petitioner has lost his interest in pursuing the case.
Petition is, accordingly, dismissed for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated.
Order Date :- 22.10.2020 Ashutosh
Parshuram Aarya
State Of U.P.
Respondent No. 4
Vivek Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
