Allahabad High Court
RAJENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. THRU SECY. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismiss
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Summary
The writ petition (Writ‑A No. 40014 of 2014) was filed by Rajendra Singh against the State of Uttar Pradesh and others. The case remained pending since 2014 and was listed among the oldest cases for a priority hearing. No counsel appeared for the petitioner, and the petition was not marked to indicate that any cause of action survived. The court noted a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 would be dismissed as infructuous if no appearance was made. Consequently, the court held that the petition had become infructuous and dismissed it. The court, however, allowed the petitioner the liberty to file a recall or restoration application if a cause of action still exists.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition can be dismissed as infructuous due to non‑appearance of counsel and lack of indication that the cause of action survives.
Subjects
- writ petition
- infructuous
- non‑appearance
- case management
- old pending cases
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 40014 of 2014
Rajendra Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : S.K. Upadhyay, Sanjeev Singh, V.K.
Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., R.C. Singh
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Case is called out. None appears for the petitioner(s). Learned Standing
Counsel for the State is present.
Record goes to show that the case is listed in the category of oldest pending
cases in the cause list, for priority hearing.
A notice is also placed in the cause list mentioning that "old cases up to the
year 2022 shall be taken up in the first round itself. In case of non-
appearance, matter shall be dismissed as infructuous or otherwise, and in the
cases, where the cause of action still survives, the concerned advocates are
expected to mark them accordingly in the cause list. Failure to do so, may
result in its dismissal as infructuous" but, neither the counsel for the
petitioner(s) has appeared nor has the case been marked to indicate that the
cause of action still survives. A notice in this regard has also been affixed on
the notice board.
This matter is pending since the year 2014. It appears that either the
petitioner(s) has/have lost interest in pursuing the matter or it has become
infructuous.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Needless to say that the petitioner(s) shall be at liberty to file
recall/restoration application in case any cause of action still survives.
September 15, 2026
Jitendra/-
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…