Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 43297 of 2002 Petitioner :- Smt. Shashi Bala Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.C. Pathak 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 quashing the impugned order dated 5.12.98 and 30.3.99 (Annexure Nos 14 and 18) passed by the respondent no. 3 illegally, unlawfully and against law of natural justice and without affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to place her view on the matter.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to allow treat the petitioner to work a Anganbari Karyakatri at village Veerampur, Tehsil Bishouli, District Budaun and the petitioner deemed in continuation in service since 5.12.98 with all consequential benefits including the seniority for the purpose of promotion on the post of Chief Supervisor.
(iii) To issue a writ, order or direction by way of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to pay the held up honorarium for the month of December, 98 to June, 99 of the petitioner with 18% penal interest as the same was held up illegally an unlawfully as the petitioner was regularly attending the center and 5 December, 98, June, 99 and distributing the Poshtahar before committee constituted by village Pradhan as per order in Annexure No. 15.
(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos 3 and 2 to decide the representations dated 5.1.2001, 10.1.2002, 3.12.2001 and 30.7.2002 shown as Annexure Nos 20, 13, 4, 24 to this writ petition speaking and reasoned order within four weeks."
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 :- 27.2.2019 Siddhant Sahu