Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 40293 of 2000 Petitioner :- Rajoo Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P.& Others Counsel for Petitioner :- V.N.Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
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, petitioner has sought following reliefs :
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 26.5.2000 (Annexure 10 of the writ petition) passed by respondent no.1 by which his authority has refused to relax the time limit of five years in making application for appointment of the petitioner under the Dying in Harness rules though the petitioner has applied for his appointment on 26.4.1991 after the death of his father on 2.1.1991.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for giving him suitable appointment under Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 in the Cane Department of State of U. P., suitable and available as per qualification of the petitioner.
(iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.
(iv) Award costs of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner."
3. I myself 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 :- 27.4.2018
Manish Himwan