Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39759 of 2004 Petitioner :- Amar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gulab Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,V.K. Singh
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
1. Called in revise. None appeared to press this writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel is present for respondents. In the circumstances, we ourselves have perused the record.
2. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:
“(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned recall order dated 10.9.2004 passed by Respondent U.-Zilaadhikari recalling his own suspension order dated 24.1.2004 in the matter of the fair Price shop Licence of the Respondent Pancham Singh (Annexure-2).
(b) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the concerned Respondents to execute agreement and to excute fair price shop licence of the village panchayat kankua in favour of the petitioner and to allow the petitioner lift and distribute essential commodities amongst the ration card holder in accordance with law.
(c) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the District magistrate of mahoba to make a detail enquiry at his level aginst the concerned Respondents and particularly against the Respondent Pancham Singh in regard to sale and stock register examination of ration cards and other relevant documents and to initiate necessary action in case the compleints are found proved within appropriate time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.”
3. We ourselves have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioner is not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for.
4. Moreover, it appears that either the cause of action no more survives or the petitioner has lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for petitioner is absent.
5. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 PS