Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18761 of 2006 Petitioner :- Mahendra Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- S. Alim Shah Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
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, petitioners have sought following reliefs:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to carry out the order of the respondent no. 2 ordering to the respondent no. 3, to Communicate date to the District Administration District Haridwar after consulting Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Tehsildar, Tehsil Nazibabad District Bijnor, for demarcation of the boundaries of the District Haridwar and District Bijnor boundary of Village Rampur Raighati and village Sabalgargarh and the plots in dispute by Joint measurement of District Administration of Bijnor and Haridwar.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents no. 2 and 3 to take all the measurements for demarcating the boundaries of the District Haridwar and District Bijnor and to demarcate the boundary of the village Rampur Raighati and village Sabalgarh, by fully co-operating in Joint measurement to the demarcation with the District Administration District Haridwar.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner.
(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to Act in accordance with law."
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 :- 30.10.2018 Siddhant Sahu