A dismissed writ petition for want of prosecution due to the petitioner's absence and lapse of time.
Dismissal of the writ petition for want of prosecution; interim order discharged.
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. - 9
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 52886 of 2006
Petitioner :- Ram Samujh Giri Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Radha Kant Ojha,Satyanshu Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Q.H. Siddiqui,V.K. Rai
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
List has been revised. Nobody is present on behalf of the petitioner whereas learned Standing Counsel for the State is present.
The matter is old one and it relates to the year 2006.
Since nobody is present on behalf of the petitioner, this Court from perusal of the record opines that the either the writ petition has become infructuous by lapse of time or the parties have lost their interest to proceed with the matter.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, stands discharged.
Since nobody is present on behalf of the petitioner, it is open to the petitioner to file application for recall of this order within two months, in case the matter is still survive.
Order Date :- 12.1.2023 saqlain
Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Ram Samujh Giri
State of U.P.
Prakash Padia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
