Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13966 (ALL)

MITHILESH KUMAR AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

WRIA/24391/2009 · 2026-10-05

Anish Kumar Gupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 24391 of 2009 Court No. - 34 (Sl. No. 31) HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. List revised. None appears for the petitioners. Yesterday also the instant petition was listed but none appears for the petitioners. 2. The instant petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "(A). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 23.10.2008, 6.2.2009 and 12.2.2009 passed by the respondents (As contained in Annexure No.4, 5 and 6 to the writ petition). (B). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to make payment of salary of the petitioner October 2008 to January 2009. (C). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to ensure selection penal considering the actual length of experience as Seasonal Collection Amin in terms of the selection year July, 2004 since the substantive vacancy arose in between the same selection year. (D). Issue a writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to grant regular appointment to the petitioners as Collection Amin forthwith. (E). Issue a writ, order or direction of suitable nature commanding the respondents to permit the petitioners to function as regular collection Amin and to pay regular monthly salary regularly every month to the petitioner. (F). Issue a writ to order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Lakshmi Kant Trigunait Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mithilesh Kumar And Another .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Others .....Respondent(s) fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (G). Award the cost of this writ petition in favour of the petitioners." 3. From the perusal of the orders dated 23.10.2008 and 12.2.2009. It appears that subsequent to the selection and appointment of the petitioners, vide appointment letter dated 26.8.2008, since the same was challenged in Writ Petition No. 27073 of 2008 (Shamsher Bahadur Vs. State of U.P. and others), wherein interim order was passed on 21.10.2008 and in view of the interim orders passed in other writ petitions, petitioners were not discontinued as Collection Amin. 4. In view of the fact that non appears on behalf of the petitioners repeatedly, it appears that either cause of action in the instant petition no more survives or the petitioners have lost their interest in pursuing thematter. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. 6. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. October 6, 2026 n.u. WRIA No. 24391 of 2009 2 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- NASEEM UDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad