Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2003 DAILYLAW 2998 (ALL)

HARI CHAND v. STATE OF U.P. THRU SECY. NAGAR VIKAS NAUBHAG-2 and ORS.

WRIA/33355/2003 · 2026-04-08

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2003

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 33355 of 2003 Petitioner :- Hari Chand Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Kr. Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vikrant Pandey Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. 1. Called in revise. None appeared on behalf of petitioner. 2. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned ordfer dated 19.7.2003 passed by the Respondent No. 3 i.e. Chairman Nagar Palika Parishad, Swar District Rampur, in pursuance of the letter dated 16.7.2003 issued by respondent no. 1 i.e. District Magistrate, Rampur with all its consequential effects. (1A) to quash official letter no. 1235/92- 2003- 39 dt. 27.6.2003 passed by the respondent no. 1 with all its consequential orders dt. 16.7.03 and 19.7.2003 passed by the respondent no. 2 and 3 with all its consequential effects otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 3. However, I have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioner is not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for. 4. Moreover, it appears that either the cause of action no more survives or that petitioner has lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for petitioner is absent. 5. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 6. Sri Sarvajeet Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vikrant Pandey, Advocate is present for respondents. Order Date :- 13.9.2018 AK