Allahabad High Court
SANTOSH PAL SINGHversusRAJU AND 9 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
The petitioners, led by counsel Rahul Sahai, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the respondents. The petition was listed but the petitioner failed to appear before the court despite a revised call. The respondents, represented by Shri Prakash and Vishal Khandelwal, were present. The court noted the absence of the petitioner and observed that the matter pertained to the year 2015. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of want of prosecution, without addressing any substantive merits.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate consequence when a petitioner fails to appear and prosecute a writ petition before the High Court?
Subjects
- Article 227
- writ petition
- dismissal for want of prosecution
- High Court
- procedural default
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6393 of 2015
Santosh Pal Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Raju And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Sahai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Shri Prakash, Vishal Khandelwal
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
1. List is revised. None appears on behalf of the petitioner even in the
revised call.
2. Mr. Vishal Khandelwal, learned counsel for the respondents is present.
3. The matter is of the year 2015.
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed for want of
prosecution.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
September 8, 2026
K.N.
Digitally signed by :-
KALP NATH SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…