Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 39170 of 2002 Petitioner :- Omkar Nath Misra And Others Respondent :- Secretary Govt. Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- S. Alim Shah,Abdul Mateen Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K. Srivastava
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Called in revise. None appeared to press this writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel is present for respondents. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record.
2. By means of present writ petition, petitioners have sought following reliefs:
"(a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in any manner in the discharging and performing the duties of the petitioners as Block Co- ordinators and Assistant Block Co-ordinators respectively in District Siddhartha Nagar.
(b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue in their services in accordance with the Government Order dated 2nd March, 1998.
(c) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus not to terminate the services of the petitioners as Block Co-ordinators and Assistant Block Co-ordinators respectively in District Siddhartha Nagar and not to revert back to the petitioners to their respective post as Head Master and Assistant Teachers.
(d) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to take action into the matter without any authority of law.
(e) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to act in accordance with law.
(f) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of declaration that the impugned order dated 29.6.2002 is not applicable to the petitioners as the Government Order dated 02nd March, 1998 is never modified by the impugned Government Order dated 29.6.2002 which will be applicable to the Go-ordinators and Assistant Co-ordinators who will be appointed after 29.06.2002.”
3. I myself 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 :- 27.2.2019 Siddhant Sahu