A writ petition from 2002 was declared infructuous due to lack of appearance and extinction of cause of action, resulting in its dismissal.
Petition dismissed as infructuous; 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. - 30
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 49384 of 2002
Petitioner :- Nazir Ahmad Respondent :- Commissioner Bareilly Division And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- R.C. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.
None appears for the petitioner even in revised call. However, Shri Jitendra Narain Rai, learned A.C.S.C. is present for the State-respondents.
The matter pertains to the year 2002, it seems that by efÒux of time either cause of action is no more surviving or for any other reason the petition has rendered infructuous. That is why none has appeared to press the petition.
In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 8.12.2022 Vinod.
Digitally signed by VINOD KUMAR JAISWAL Date: 2022.12.22 13:55:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Nazir Ahmad
Commissioner Bareilly Division
Umesh Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
