IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 230 of 2003 Anil Kumar Saxena ….…... Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………. Respondents None for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel (State of Uttarakhand) for the respondents. Date of Judgment: 24.11.2010 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble Nirmal Yadav, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) After the pleadings were concluded, as it appears from the records, at the request of the petitioner and his counsel, the hearing of the writ petition was adjourned from time to time, except on the last occasion, when none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. On the last occasion, a direction was given for listing of the writ petition in its turn. Since then, it is appearing in the list for the last two weeks. Despite that, none appears. 2. The writ petition is dismissed for default. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 24.11.2010 24.11.2010 Amit