Allahabad High Court
SULTAN AHMAD KHANversusTHE REGIONAL MANAGER NORTHERN RAILWAY AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Summary
The petitioner, Sultan Ahmad Khan, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside a 2015 order of the Civil Judge and a 2021 order of the Additional District Judge that had rejected his interim injunction application and its appeal. The petition was listed as infructuous and no counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The court observed that the petition was either infructuous, the petitioner was not interested in pursuing it, or the cause of action no longer survived. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as infructuous, granting liberty to recall if any cause of action remains. The judgment was delivered by Justice Anish Kumar Gupta on September 30, 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the petition is infructuous and should be dismissed
Subjects
- Article 227
- supervisory jurisdiction
- infructuous petition
- injunction
- appeal
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2587 of 2022
Sultan Ahmad Khan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The Regional Manager Northern Railway And 2
Others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aktar Ahmed Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Pranay Krishna
Court No. - 34
(SN.45)
HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. This matter is listed in infructuous category.
2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner.
3. The instant petition was filed by the petitioner with the following
prayers:
“I. to set aside the judgement and order dated 27.02.2015
(Annx.-3) passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) Shahjahanpur in
Original Suit No.179 of 2010 (Sultan Ahmad Khan Vs.
Regional Manager Northern Railway Shahjahanpur and
others) and judgement and order dated 04.12.2021
(ANNEXURE NO.5) passed by Additional District Judge,
Shahjahanpur in Misc. Appeal No.12 of 2015 (Sultan Ahmad
Khan Vs. Regional Manager Railway others) and allow
application 10 (Ga). Shahjahanpur and the injuction”
4. It is apparent that vide order dated 27.02.2015, the application for
interim injunction filed by the petitioner in Original Suit No. 179 of 2010
was rejected. Being aggrieved, a miscellaneous appeal was filed. The said
appeal was also rejected. Being aggrieved, the instant petition has been
filed.
A227 No. 2587 of 2022
2
5. The instant petition has been listed in the infructuous category. None
appears on behalf of the petitioner.
6. In such view of the matter, either the petition has become infructuous
or the petitioner is not interested to pursue the instant petition or the cause
of action no more survives in the instant petition.
7. In such view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as
infructuous with liberty to recall, if the cause of action survives in the
matter.
(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
September 30, 2026
Shubham Arya
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM ARYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…