Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

GOVING SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 ORS.

Decided

Holding

The petition is dismissed as not pressed.

Summary

The petitioner, Goving Singh, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and four other respondents. The petition was listed peremptorily, and the petitioner’s counsel, Manish Kumar Pandey, requested an adjournment on a previous occasion. On the current date, the counsel informed the court that he could not contact his client and believed the grievance might have been resolved, so no further steps were taken. The court noted the lack of a live cause of action and held that the petition was not pressed. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, directing the petitioner that a recall application may be filed if the cause of action still exists.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate procedural response when a writ petition is no longer pressed due to the petitioner’s inability to be contacted and a possible resolution of the grievance?

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • dismissal
  • not pressed
  • procedural law
  • High Court

Judgment

                                             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                           WRIT - A No. - 29116 of 2016

                                    Goving Singh
                                                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                      Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 4 Ors.
                                                                                             .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)                  :   Manish Kumar Pandey
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)                  :   C.S.C.

                                    Court No. - 34
                                    (Sl. No. 33)
                                                     HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

                                    1. This matter is listed peremptorily today. On the last occasion also, the
                                    matter was adjourned on the request made on behalf of the learned
                                    counsel for the petitioner. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner
                                    submits that he is not in a position to contact his client and it appears
                                    that the grievance of the petitioner might have been resolved, therefore,
                                    he has not tried to contact his counsel.

                                    2. In such view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not
                                    pressed.

                                    3. The petitioner may file the recall application if the cause of action
                                    still survives in the matter.



                                                                                      (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
                                    September 8, 2026
                                    n.u.




Digitally signed by :-
NASEEM UDDIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.