Allahabad High Court
MUKESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismiss
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as infractuous due to non‑appearance and lack of indication that the cause of action survives.
Summary
The writ petition filed by Mukesh Kumar in 2014 remained pending for over a decade. The court issued notices directing that old cases up to 2022 be heard and that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to show that the cause of action survived. Consequently, the court held that the petition had become infructuous and dismissed it. The judgment noted that the petitioner could file a recall or restoration application if a cause of action still existed. The decision was pronounced by Justice Manju Rani Chauhan on 15 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition pending for an extended period and lacking the petitioner’s appearance can be dismissed as infructuous
Subjects
- writ petition
- non‑appearance
- infructuous
- case management
- procedural dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 48857 of 2014
Mukesh Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Ors
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Dwivedi
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…