Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34751 (ALL)

ANIL PRATAP SINGH AND OTHERS v. UNION OF INDIA THRU SECY. AND ORS.

WRIA/42126/2007 · 2025-03-17

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38458 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 42126 of 2007 Petitioner :- Anil Pratap Singh And Others Respondent :- Union Of India Thru Secy. And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.,B.P. Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Special B.T.C. Training Course, 2007 as notified by the Government of U.P. (annexed as annexure No.1 to this writ petition). ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the State of U.P. to notify a fresh vacancies for a proper two years B.T.C. Training Programme. iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the State of U.P. to have a common entrance examination to be held State- wise and no district wise. iv. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the authorities concerned to give 10% weightage to the petitioners in the BTC Training Programme if it will be notified/Advertized by the Government of U.P. as per the Government Order dated 15.6.2007." 2. This writ petition was filed in the year 2007 and on 11.9.2007, this Court has passed the following order: "Learned Additional Solicitor general of India has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.1, learned Standing Counsel for respondents no.3, 4, 6 and 7 and Sri B.P. Singh for respondent no.5. Issue notice to respondent no.2 fixing a date immediately after two months. All the respondents may file counter affidavit by the next date." 3. The office report indicates that petitioner has not taken steps to issue notice to opposite party no.2. Even today, no one appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this writ petition. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, since the petitioner and his counsel remain lethargic and even no steps was taken to issue notice to respondent no.2 and otherwise also considering nature of the prayer and due to afflux of time, it is very likely that petitioners may not be interested to pursue this writ petition. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Mohini Digitally signed by :- MOHINI RAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad