Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7928 (JK)

INHABITANTS OF GAGRIBAL, SRINAGAR v. UT OF J AND K AND OTHERS (EXCISE AND TAXATION)

WP(C)/1641/2021 · 2025-07-28

Wasim Sadiq Nargal

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No.94 Regular Cause list HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR … WP(C) No.1641/2021 INHABITANTS OF GAGRIBAL, SRINAGAR ……...Petitioner(s) Through: None Versus UNION TERRITORY OF J&K AND ORS. .……Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Furqan, GA for R. 1 to 4. Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Parimoksh Seth, Adv. for R. 5 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 28.07.2025 1. The record reveals that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 16.12.2023 and on 18.12.2024, a request for adjournment was made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 20.12.2024, again there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Today also when the matter was taken up, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner and thus, an inference can be drawn that the petitioner has lost interest in prosecuting the instant petition. Even on the other hand, the matter with the efflux of time has been rendered infructuous in the light of the submission made by Mr. Sunil Sethi, learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 5. 3. The petitioner through the medium of the instant petition has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to close and shift the proposed liquor vend shop from Dalgate, Boulevard, Srinagar to some other place with a further direction not to allow/allot any license for running of liquor vend shop at Boulevard Dalgate, Srinagar. 4. Mr. Sunil Sethi, learned Sr. Counsel has submitted that the liquor license to run the shop was in favour of the respondent No. 5 for the particular year 2021-22 which period is over by now and even on this ground, the instant petition has been rendered infructuous. 5. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid backdrop, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep this petition alive and since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, the same is dismissed for non prosecution. 6. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE Srinagar 28.07.2025 “SAKEENA-PS”