Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Raj Dev Yadav vs State Of U P Thru Secy And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|24 April, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 34262 of 2014 Petitioner :- Raj Dev Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Yadav,Abhishek Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajit Kumar Singh,Neeraj Tripathi
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
1. Called in revise. None appeared to press this writ petition. Shri Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate and Shri Akash Dwivedi, Advocate holding brief of Shri Neeraj Tripathi 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) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the impugned order dated 12.05.2014 passed by Chancellor, U.P. Rajarshi Tandon Open University, Raj Bhawan Lucknow (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition).
(ii) To issue a also a writ, order or direction in the nature of a mandamus commanding the respondents to grant periodic renewal to the engagement of the petitioner a Lecturer in Special Education and permit and allow the petitioner to discharge his duties as Lecturer (Special Education for visually impaired) in School o Education, U.P. Rajashi Tandon Open University Allahabad and to pay the petitioner his regular monthly emoluments month to month as and when it becomes due and the arrears with the interest thereon."
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 :- 24.4.2018 Swati
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Raj Dev Yadav vs State Of U P Thru Secy And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
24 April, 2018
Judges
  • Sudhir Agarwal
Advocates
  • Vinod Kumar Yadav Abhishek Kumar Yadav