Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 56392 of 2005 Petitioner :- K.P. Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Avas & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- T.N. Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Alok Kumar,Vashistha Tiwari
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 and Sri Alok Kumar, Advocate, are present for respondents. In the circumstances, we ourselves have perused the record.
2. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:
“i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders passed by District Magistrate, Deoria dt. 28.4.05 as conveyed by Additional District Magistrate vide order dt. 16.5.05 (Annexure no. 17), order dt. 20.6.03 of the District Magistrate as conveyed by order of Additional District Magistrate dt. 15.7.04 9Annexure no. 16), order dt. 21.12.99 of the District Magistrate as conveyed by order of Additional District Magistrate dt. 30.12.99 (Annexure no. 7) as well as order dt 7.3.03 (Annexure no. 11) passed by District Magistrate, Deoria.
ii) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2, District Magistrate, Deoria to consider the application of the petitioner fro free hold in accordance with the provisions contained under Govt. order dt. 1.12.98 and in accordance with paragraph no. 3 of the aforesaid Govt. order as provided under subsequent Govt. order dt. 17.1.03.
iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in the right of the petitioner in any manner whatsoever till his claim is decided afresh finally in accordance with aforesaid Govt. orders.”
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