D/L.52. JUNE 16, 2026. KAUSHIK. WPA No. 25090 of 2005 CAN 1 of 2009 (Old CAN 5313 of 2009) Biswanath Agarwal Vs. CESC Ltd. None appears on behalf of the parties nor is any adjournment prayed for even in the second call. This matter was appearing in the Warning List and the parties have sufficient notice that the same would be taken up for hearing. There is also no adjournment prayed for on their behalf. A Report filed by the Department indicates that despite efforts, the records of this proceeding are not traceable. It also appears from the Report that the proceeding is not traceable even in the CIS as well as the available Rule Register and Movement Registers under the custody of the Mandamus Section. In view of the above, WPA 25090 of 2005 along with connected interlocutory applications stands dismissed for default. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated. The department is directed to take necessary steps forthwith. (Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.)

D/L.52. JUNE 16, 2026. KAUSHIK. WPA No. 25090 of 2005 CAN 1 of 2009 (Old CAN 5313 of 2009) Biswanath Agarwal Vs. CESC Ltd. None appears on behalf of the parties nor is any adjournment prayed for even in the second call. This matter was appearing in the Warning List and the parties have sufficient notice that the same would be taken up for hearing. There is also no adjournment prayed for on their behalf. A Report filed by the Department indicates that despite efforts, the records of this proceeding are not traceable. It also appears from the Report that the proceeding is not traceable even in the CIS as well as the available Rule Register and Movement Registers under the custody of the Mandamus Section. In view of the above, WPA 25090 of 2005 along with connected interlocutory applications stands dismissed for default. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated. The department is directed to take necessary steps forthwith. (Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.)