Allahabad High Court
SATISH KUMAR BHATNAGARversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Summary
Satish Kumar Bhatnagar filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 33136 of 2007) against the Union of India seeking relief after three charge‑sheets were issued to him. The High Court directed the respondent to file a counter‑affidavit to show what action had been taken. Both parties exchanged counter‑affidavit and rejoinder, the latter filed on 20‑08‑2008 when the petitioner was 54 years old. The court observed that the petitioner would now have attained the age of superannuation, rendering the petition moot due to the lapse of time. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as infructuous.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition remains maintainable after the petitioner attains superannuation
- Whether the passage of time renders the petition infructuous and liable to dismissal
Subjects
- writ petition
- superannuation
- infructuous
- passage of time
- procedural law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 33136 of 2007
Satish Kumar Bhatnagar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : A.S. Diwekar, Meraj Uddin
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, Govind Saran,
Kaushif Zaidi, SC, Vivek Singh
Court No. - 34
(Sl. No. 26)
HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. List revised. None appears for the petitioner to press the instant
petition. Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent
is present.
2. Vide order dated 24.7.2007, this Court has called for the counter
affidavit to apprise the Court as to what action has been taken after the
three charge-sheets were issued to the petitioner. Counter affidavit and
rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties. At the time
of filing of the rejoinder affidavit, which was filed on 20.8.2008, age of
the petitioner was 54 years. Thus, as of now the petitioner might have
attained the age of superannuation long back. As such, the instant petition
has become infructuous due to passage of time.
3. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
May 7, 2026
n.u.
Digitally signed by :-
NASEEM UDDIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…