Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50623 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 34407 of 2013 Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Gautam And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Ashok Khare,Kushmondeya Shahi Counsel for Respondent :- Bhanu Pratap Singh Kachhawah,Brajesh Kumar,Prakhar Srivastava,Yatindra 2. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 35954 of 2013 Petitioner :- Hari Shanker And Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Khare,Siddharth Khare Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1.Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava,, learned counsel for the petitioners in WRIT-A No.-34407 of 2013 and in the connected case Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Kauntey Singh on behalf of petitioners, Sri Yatindra for respondent nos.3 and 4 and Sri B.P.Singh Kachhwaha for respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the present case petitioners have challenged a Circular dated 14.6.2013 issued by the Secretary, U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Shiksha Nideshalaya, Allahabad. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that Circular dated 14.6.2013 has now been withdrawn on 28.5.2015 and now a new circular has been issued. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers a judgment passed by this Court in Tapeshwar Ram & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors, Neutral Citation No.2024:AHC:42824 that said bunch of writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 11.3.2024. For reference, relevant paragraphs no.9 and 10 of it are reproduced hereinafter: " 9. In aforesaid circumstances, this Court is not entering into merit of the case, however, considering that this matter is pending for last 8-9 years and their dispute is in regard to seniority and there are rival submissions on law, therefore, the petitioners would be at liberty to file fresh objection, however, it is made clear that in case objections are considered, all likely to affected parties will be put on notice so that they may submit their reply. Some persons have already been retired, therefore, they would not be affected. 10. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with above observations and directions that objections, if any is filed, will be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, taking note of factual as well as legal aspect." 5. Learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 and 4 submits that on the basis of subsequent events, this writ petition has rendered infructuous and in reference of Tapeshwar (supra) it is submitted that the case was decided on basis of subsequent circular. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the Circular dated 14.6.2013 has now been withdrawn on 28.5.2015, therefore, its legal consequence shall follow and the petitioners have filed a subsequent representation and prays that same may be decided. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, since the prayer made in this writ petition has rendered infructuous as Circular dated 14.6.2013 has now been withdrawn as referred above and since subsequent circular is now in existence, therefore, claim of the petitioner if still pending will be considered on the basis of legal consequence on two factors i.e. withdrawal of Circular dated 14.6.2013 and subsequent circular issued on 29.5.2015. 8. Both the writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with a direction that grievance of the petitioners will be considered in the light of above referred observations. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 SB Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad