Anil Pandey vs The State of Jharkhand

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties.

The order dated 29th June 2016, whereby W.P.(C)

No.3936/2012 was dismissed for non-appearance, reads as under :-

"When the case was called out, none appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this writ application. It appears from the earlier order dated 23.07.2013 passed by this court that none was present on behalf of the petitioner to press this writ application. Thereafter, again this case was listed on 10.09.2015 and on that day also none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Again on 22.06.2016, prayer for adjournment was made on behalf of the petitioner and by way of last indulgence, this case was adjourned to 29.06.2016, with a direction that no further adjournment will be granted to any of the parties on any ground. Today also when the case is called out, none appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this case. It appears that petitioner has no interest in this case. Hence, this writ application is dismissed for non-appearance."

Petitioner has sought restoration of the writ petition by way of

the instant petition. Apparently no grounds have been shown for non-

representation on behalf of the petitioner on the previous dates. The

Coordinate Bench of this Court taking note of the adjournments granted

earlier, was pleased to adjourn the matter by way of last indulgence with a

clear direction that no further adjournment to any of the parties on any

ground would be granted. Since there was no representation again on the

fateful day, the writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.

Petitioner has failed to show sufficient ground for restoration of

the writ petition. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer

made. Accordingly the instant petition is dismissed.