Allahabad High Court
RAMPALversusSTATE OF U.P. 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 Rampal in 2014 remained pending for over a decade with no appearance by the petitioner’s counsel. The court noted a notice directing that old cases up to 2022 be taken up and dismissed as infructuous if there was no appearance or indication that the cause of action survived. Since the petitioner’s counsel neither appeared nor marked the case as surviving, the court inferred loss of interest or that the cause of action had become infructuous. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, while allowing the petitioner the liberty to file a recall or restoration application if any cause of action still exists. The judgment was delivered by Justice Manju Rani Chauhan on 15 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition pending for a long period and without appearance can be dismissed as infructuous
Subjects
- writ petition
- infructuous
- non‑appearance
- pending case
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 41338 of 2014
Rampal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. 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.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
September 15, 2026
Jitendra/-
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…