Ram Surat Pandey v. D.D.C.Faizabad and Others

Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 469 of 2000 Petitioner :- Ram Surat Pandey Respondent :- D.D.C.Faizabad And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.U.Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharamendra Pandey,R.K.Srivastava,Vijai Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶1Case called out in revised list. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner to press this petition. However, learned State counsel is present in the Court.

¶2It appears that learned counsel for the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the case despite the fact that writ petition is pending since 2000.

¶3It would be appropriate to refer two maxims:-

(i) Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt (The law assists only those who are vigilant, and not those who sleep over their rights); and

(ii) Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (In the interest of the society as a whole, the litigation must come to an end). The above said two maxims are sister provisions, which would highlight and spotlight that the party seeking remedy before the Court should be vigilant, otherwise, the law would not come to their help and there should be end to litigation.

¶4Considering the aforesaid, this Court feels that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Accordingly, it is dismissed for non-prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Order Date :- 11.10.2023/Vinay/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench