Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) THE instant writ petition came for admission on 1.12.2014, when an adjournment was sought whereupon the matter was directed to be put up after lunch to enable the learned Counsel for the petitioner to make his submissions. Again, when the matter was taken up after lunch, a mention was made that the Counsel for the petitioner is ill.
(2.) UNDER the circumstances, the order was reserved while granting liberty to the learned Counsel for the petitioner to submit his written arguments by the next day. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has failed to submit the written arguments despite time having been granted to the same.
(3.) THE writ petition arises out of objections filed under section 12 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. It appears that several objections were decided by a common order.;