Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5757 of 2015 Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Behari And Anr.
Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Arvind Srivastava,Saurabh Srivastava
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,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, petitioners have sought following reliefs:
"(I) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment dated 12.12.14 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad in Original Application No. 1593 of 2011 (Jitendra Kumar Behari & Another Vs. Union of India & Others) (Annexure 2 to the petition).
(II) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 09.11.11 issued by the General Manager (Administration) on behalf of the General Manager, Ordinance Equipment Factory, Kanpur (Annexure 1A& 1B to this writ petition).
(III) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature declaring the stipulation requiring affiliation to All India Council for Technical Education in SRO -66 dated 27.05.03 as being ultra vires and inoperative.
(IV) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to forthwith declare the result of the petitioners pertaining to Limited Departmental Competitive Examination 2011-12 and based upon such result to grant promotion to the petitioners as Charge man (Technical) within a period to be specified by this Hon'ble Court."
3. We ourselves have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioners are 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 petitioners have 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 petitioners is absent.
5. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Vikram