Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RAHMAT FRUIT CENTREversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition is dismissed as infructuous because a later order has already decided the matter.

Summary

The petition (Writ No. 37629 of 2011) filed by Rahmat Fruit Centre against the State of Uttar Pradesh and others sought relief, but no counsel appeared for the petitioner. The respondent’s counsel informed the court that a later writ petition (No. 5874 of 2022) had already been decided, rendering the earlier petition moot. The petitioner expressly admitted that the earlier petition was now infructuous. The court therefore held that there was no substantive dispute to be adjudicated. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and recorded as an infructuous matter.

Issues considered

  • Whether the writ petition filed in 2011 should be dismissed as infructuous in view of a subsequent order in a later writ petition filed by the same petitioner

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • infructuous
  • dismissal
  • procedural
  • subsequent order

Judgment

                                             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                            WRIT - C No. - 37629 of 2011

                                    Rahmat Fruit Centre
                                                                                                .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                       Versus

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

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)       : Anil Kumar Pathak
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)       : C.S.C., Satish Mandhyan, V B Mishra,
                                                                      Ved Byas Mishra

                                    Court No. - 1
                                                    HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
                                                    HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.

                                    1. List has been revised. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner,
                                    however, Shri Mani Shankar Mishra, learned counsel hold brief of Shri
                                    Ved Byas Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 is
                                    present.

                                    2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondent that this petition
                                    has rendered infructuous, in view of the order passed by the Division
                                    Bench in a subsequent writ petition filed by the same petitioner bearing
                                    petition No. 5874 of 2022. An admission of the petitioner has been
                                    recorded to the effect that the writ petition bearing no. 37629 of 2011, that
                                    present petition has rendered infructuous.

                                    3. In view of above the petition is dismissed and consigned to record as
                                    infructuous matter.



                                                                (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Bhanu




Digitally signed by :-
BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA
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.