Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Usman Ul Haque & Others v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - A No. 8918 of 1996 [2004] RD-AH 235 (6 May 2004)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.23

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8918 of 1996

Usman-ul-Haq and others Vs. State of U.P. and others


Hon'ble V.C. Misra, J.

Heard Sri M.A. Qadeer, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mohan Yadav, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

This writ petition was filed by the petitioners seeking relief to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 27.2.1996 (annexures-19 to 26 to the writ petition) terminating the services of the petitioners. By an interim order dated 13.3.1996 passed by this Court, the operation of the impugned orders dated 27.2.1996 (annexures-19 to 26) were kept in abeyance with liberty to the respondents to pass such orders as they deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case taking into consideration the government order dated 10.10.1995. The petitioner has filed an application dated 21.10.2003 supported by an affidavit wherein it has been mentioned in para-5, that the respondents in pursuance of the order dated 13.3.1996 passed by this Court have taken final decision in the matter of the petitioners by which order their services have been regularized. In response to the said affidavit, the respondents have filed an affidavit-dated 19.8.2002 in rebuttal, wherein they have admitted the above said facts that final decision dated 7.9.2000 has been issued in favour of the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners Sri M.A. Qadeer has submitted that in view of the said facts the writ petition has become infructuous since the reliefs sought for have already been granted in their favour and he does not want to press the writ petition any further. Sri M.A. Qadeer, learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the impugned orders be quashed since the respondents have already regularized the services of the petitioner.

Under the said circumstances and in view of the above said facts, the impugned orders already stand superceeded. The writ petition is disposed off having become infructuous. No order as to costs.

May 6, 2004



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.