Allahabad High Court
NAGMA PARVEENversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
A writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous when the petitioner fails to appear and does not indicate that the cause of action continues.
Summary
The petitioner, Nagma Parveen, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 8028 of 2022) in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The matter had been pending since 2022 and was listed under the oldest pending cases for a priority hearing. The court issued a notice directing that old cases be taken up and warned that non‑appearance could lead to dismissal as infructuous. Neither the petitioner’s counsel appeared nor was the case marked to indicate that the cause of action still survived. Consequently, the court held that the petition had become infructuous and dismissed it, while allowing the petitioner to file a recall or restoration application if a cause of action still exists.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous due to non‑appearance of counsel and lack of indication that the cause of action survives.
Subjects
- writ petition
- infructuous dismissal
- non‑appearance
- cause of action
- high court procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 8028 of 2022
Nagma Parveen
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajitabh Choubey, B.B.Rai, Prabhakar
Awasthi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Archana Singh, C.S.C., Yatindra
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Case is called out. None appears for the parties.
The case is listed in the category of oldest pending cases in the cause list, for
priority hearing.
A notice has been placed on the notice board specifically, 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 has appeared nor has the case been marked to
indicate that the cause of action still survives.
Record shows that the matter is pending since the year 2022. It appears that
either the petitioner has 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 shall be at liberty to file recall/restoration
application in case any cause of action still survives.
March 18, 2026
Vinod.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…