Irshad Hussain, J.

Heard Sri M.C. Kandpal, counsel for the petitioner, learned C.S.C. and Sri Paresh Tripathi, counsel for the respondent no. 2.

2. In the aforesaid writ petition, a miscellaneous application was filed with the prayer that the writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed. Since the move was opposed on behalf of the respondents, the case was listed on 14.06:2~02 for order. On this date the respondents filed rejoinder affidavit wherein it was urged that since the petitioner had filed fabricated documents to make out a ground for filing the writ petition to reiterate his claim for appointment under dying in harness rules, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs since the ground therefor was palpably false.

3. The petitioner had filed Civil Miscellaneous writ petition no. 2367 of 1999 in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad with a prayer that the respondents be directed by means of a writ of mandamus to give appointment on compassionate ground under the dying in harness rules on account of death of his mother Smt. Prema Tiwari who was employed as a teacher. The writ petition was, at the stage of admission, disposed of finally by dir