Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SMT. SANJA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution due to repeated adjournments caused by the petitioner's counsel.

Summary

The petitioner, Smt. Sanja Devi, filed a writ petition in 2011 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner's counsel repeatedly sought adjournments, submitting illness slips on 11-02-2020, 19-02-2026, and again on the day of a peremptory hearing. The court noted that the petition concerned events from 2011 and that the counsel's repeated absences were causing undue delay. Despite the peremptory listing, the judges refused further adjournment. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate procedural response when a petitioner's counsel repeatedly seeks adjournments, causing delay in a writ petition?

Subjects

  • procedural law
  • writ petition
  • adjournment
  • want of prosecution
  • civil procedure

Judgment

                                             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                            WRIT - C No. - 12921 of 2011

                                    Smt. Sanja Devi
                                                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                       Versus

                                    State of U.P. and Others
                                                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Kaushal Kumar Singh, S.A. Imam,
                                                                       Suneel Rai
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)        : Anuj Srivastava, C.S.C., Ramendra
                                                                       Pratap Singh

                                    Court No. - 40
                                                     HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
                                                     HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

                                    1. Sri Kaushal Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has
                                    submitted illness slips on the last two dates, i.e., 11.02.2020 and
                                    19.02.2026. On both occasions, the case was adjourned on account of the
                                    illness of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

                                    2. The matter is listed peremptorily today, Sri Kaushal Kumar Singh has
                                    sen an illness slip again.

                                    3. Since the writ petition pertains to the year 2011 and repeated illness
                                    slips have been sent by Sri Kaushal Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the
                                    petitioner, we are not inclined to adjourn the case as the matter has been
                                    listed peremptorily.

                                    4. The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

                                    5. Sri Anuj Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents is present.



                                                                (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)
                                    March 18, 2026
                                    Arif




Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.