Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

THE NAGRIK SAHAKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD.versusSTATE OF U.P. THRU SECY. AND OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner failed to appear and the cause of action became stale.

Summary

The Nagrik Sahakari Awas Samiti Ltd filed a writ petition against the State of Uttar Pradesh. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner and no adjournment was sought. The court held that the cause of action had become stale due to the petitioner's failure to press the petition. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous and any interim order was vacated. The court allowed the petitioner six weeks to move an application if it believes the matter still subsists.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition can be dismissed as infructuous due to the petitioner's non‑appearance and resultant staleness of the cause of action

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • staleness
  • infructuous
  • non‑appearance
  • interim order vacated

Judgment

                                                     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                                WRIT - C No. - 8293 of 2013

                                    The Nagrik Sahakari Awas Samiti Ltd.
                                                                                                  .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                          Versus

                                    State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others
                                                                                                .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)           : Manish Goyal, Sudeep Harkauli
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)           : C.S.C., J.N.Maurya, M.C. Chaturvedi

                                    Court No. - 21
                                                      HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
                                                      HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

                                    1. The matter was taken up in the revised list. However, none appeared on
                                    behalf of the petitioner to press the petition, nor has any adjournment slip
                                    been moved. Sri J.N.Maurya, learned counsel for the contesting-respondent
                                    is present.

                                    2. In the absence of any effective representation, it appears that the cause of
                                    action has become stale and the writ petition has been rendered infructuous
                                    by efflux of time.

                                    3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order,
                                    if any, stands vacated.

                                    4. In case the petitioner feels that the matter survives, liberty is granted to
                                    him to move an application for recalling this order within six weeks from
                                    today.



                                                           (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
                                    March 18, 2026
                                    A.K.Srivastava




Digitally signed by :-
ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
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.