Allahabad High Court
ARVIND SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. THRU SECY. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismiss
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous due to non‑appearance and lack of indication that the cause of action survives.
Summary
The writ petition filed by Arvind Singh in 2014 remained pending for several years without any appearance by the petitioner’s counsel. The High Court noted that the case was listed among the oldest pending matters and a notice had been issued requiring parties to indicate whether the cause of action still survived, failing which the matter would be dismissed as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the petition marked to show a surviving cause of action. 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. The judgment was delivered on 15 September 2026 by Justice Manju Rani Chauhan.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate consequence when a petitioner fails to appear and does not indicate that the cause of action survives in a pending writ petition?
Subjects
- writ petition
- non‑appearance
- infructuous dismissal
- case management
- procedural law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 40282 of 2014
Arvind Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : S.K. Upadhyay, 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…