Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 26752 of 2013 Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 7 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikas Budhwar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,S.K.Paliwal
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
1. Called in revise. None appeared to press this writ petition. Shri S. K. Paliwal 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 commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Executive Engineer and is case the petitioners are found suitable, they may be provided promotion on the post of Executive Engineer.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-determine the quota and eligibility of petitioners viz-a-viz private respondents and other similarly situated persons on the basis of their substantive appointments ignoring the benefits granted to them on the basis of Notification dated 04.08.1987.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to re-consider the eligibility and seniority while according the benefits to the private respondents an other similarly situated persons on the basis of Notification dated 04.08.1987. (iv) Issue a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to make any promotion on the basis of notification dated 04.08.1997, which has been set aside by the Division Bench of this Ho'ble Court."
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 are absent.
5. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 26.4.2018 Swati