Dismissed¶14

Dharampal v. State of U.P. and 27 Others

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2025WRIC/14912/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ - C No. 14912 of 2025; Dharampal v. State of U.P. & 27 others; Allahabad High Court; Prakash Padia, J.; 18.09.2025; dismissal in default; non-prosecution; no appearance by petitioner in revised calling of list; re-counting done during pendency; petition argued to be infructuous; contesting-respondents counsel Neha Khan; State represented by Standing Counsel/C.S.C.; no merits decided; no costs or quantum; no statute or case cited.

What did the court decide?

The present petition is dismissed in default, since nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner to press it even in the revised calling of the list. ¶14

Dharampal Vs State of U.P. and 27 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 14912 of 2025

Dharampal

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 27 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Panchu Ram Maurya, Maurya	Shashank
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Neha Khan

¶9

Court No. - 6

¶10

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

¶11

List has been revised.

¶12

Nobody is present on behalf of petitioner to press this petition even in the revised calling of the list whereas Ms. Neha Khan, learned counsel on behalf of contesting-respondents as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents are present.

¶13

It is argued that during the pendency of the present petition re-counting has already been done, hence the present petition has now become infructuous.

¶14