Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 923 of 2004 Petitioner :- Nand Lal And 4 Ors Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation Hardoi And 11 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Nirmal Tewari,Dharmendra Gupta,Manzar Ali Khan,Satish Chandra Sitapuri Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,C.H Mishra,Kanhaiya Lal Verma,Rajendra Prasad Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Case called out. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition. However, learned counsel representing side opposite is present in the Court. 2. It appears that the petitioners and the counsel engaged by the petitioners both have lost the interest in the case and are not interested in pursuing the petition. 3. It would be appropriate to refer two maxims:- (i) Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt (The law assists only those who are vigilant, and not those who sleep over their rights); and (ii) Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (In the interest of the society as a whole, the litigation must come to an end). The above said two maxims are sister provisions, which would highlight and spotlight that the party seeking remedy before the Court should be vigilant, otherwise, the law would not come to their help and there should be end to litigation. 4. Considering the aforesaid, this Court feels that the petition should not be disposed of on merits and should be dismissed for non-prosecution. Accordingly, it is dismissed for non- prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Mohit Singh/- Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench