Allahabad High Court
RAM DHARIversusSTATE OF U.P.AND 2 ORS.
- Decided
- Bench
- ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Summary
Petitioner Ram Dhari filed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order dated 09.04.2013 that terminated his services as Collection Amin and also sought a mandamus directing his regular posting and payment of salary and benefits. He argued that the termination was illegal and that he should be reinstated. The petitioner was later reinstated by a separate order dated 30.01.2020 and subsequently retired on 31.01.2024. The court observed that, given the passage of time and the petitioner’s retirement, the relief sought could no longer be granted. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for a petition seeking quashing of a termination order and mandamus for regular posting when the petitioner has retired?
Subjects
- writ of certiorari
- mandamus
- service termination
- reinstatement
- retirement
- infructuous petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 23821 of 2013
Ram Dhari
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P.And 2 Ors.
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : B.P. Srivastava, Chandra Mohan Singh,
Pradeep Kumar, Praveen Kumar, Syed Wajid
Ali
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 34
(SN.18.4)
HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. List Revised. There is an illness slip on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The instant petition was filed with the following prayer:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing
the order dated 09.04.2013 passed by respondent no.2 (Annexure No.1);
and
(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents to permit the petitioner to work as regular Collection
Amin in Tehsil Gyanpur, Bhadohi and pay the regular salary as well as
other benefits;"
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by order dated 09.04.2013, services
of the petitioner were terminated with immediate effect. Thereafter, on the subsequent
petition filed by the petitioner being Writ A No. 922 of 2020 against the suspension
order, the petitioner was reinstated vide order dated 30.01.2020 and later he has retired
on 31.01.2024. In such view of the matter, the instant petition has become infructuous
due to passage of time.
4. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as infructuous.
May 7, 2026
Shubham Arya
(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM ARYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…