Facts of the Case

·         Parties Involved: The writ petition was filed by the petitioner, Mohd. Asif Jan, against the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and others.

·         Absence of Representative: During successive crucial hearings held on May 26, 2022, and October 21, 2022, there was absolutely no legal representation or appearance made on behalf of the petitioner.

·         Final Listing Status: When the matter was called up for hearing on December 30, 2022, no one appeared or put in an appearance for the petitioner once again. Meanwhile, the respondents were duly represented by Ms. Chetna Manhas, assisting counsel to Mr. Amit Gupta, AAG.

Issues Involved

·         Whether the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on account of continuous non-appearance, default, and a apparent lack of interest by the petitioner in prosecuting the matter.

Petitioner’s Arguments

·         There were no arguments advanced as no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner during the material dates of the hearings or on the final day of the listing.

Respondent’s Arguments

·         The respondents appeared through their counsel; however, due to the complete absence of the petitioner, no active arguments on merits were required to be addressed.

Court Order / Findings

·         Observation of Conduct: The Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh (Jammu Bench), presided over by Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma, took note of the recurring absences on May 26, 2022, October 21, 2022, and December 30, 2022.

·         Inference of Abandonment: The Court inferred that the petitioner had lost all interest in actively pursuing the legal remedy sought under the writ petition.

·         Final Ruling: Consequently, the High Court dismissed the writ petition along with all connected interim applications in default of appearance and for non-prosecution.

Important Clarification

·         Procedural Dismissal: This order serves as a strict reminder of procedural compliance. A dismissal "in default of appearance and for non-prosecution" means the Court has closed the case files solely because the aggrieved party failed to show up to argue their grievance, without the Court having evaluated or ruled upon the actual merits or legal questions of the case.

Sections / Laws Involved

·         Article 226 of the Constitution of India (Power of High Courts to issue certain writs)

·         Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), Order IX Rule 8 (Procedure where defendant only appears – dismissal of suit for plaintiff’s non-appearance)


Link to download the order -

https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1782972214_100compressed.pdf

 Disclaimer This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.