JUDGMENT Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no.5 to pay regular pension of the petitioner and decide his representation dated 1.10.2015. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed, in which it is stated that in respect of similar grievance, petitioner alongwith three others had earlier filed a Writ Petition No.55120 of 2015, which was dismissed as not pressed, without any liberty being granted by the writ court to institute a fresh petition. The order dated 28.9.2015 passed in Writ Petition No.55120 of 2015 is reproduced: - "At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no. 1 and 4 and Sri Brij Raj Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents no. 2 and 3 have no objection to the aforesaid prayer. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as not pressed. No order as to costs." 3. It is also stated in para 7 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner is being regularly paid pension and the delay, which may have arisen, was on account of lack of release of funds, and as and when the funds have been received from the State Government, the pension alongwith arrears have been released. It has also been stated that all endeavours would be made to release pension as soon as funds are available. 4. Since this is a second writ petition, as such, it is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained under Chapter XXII rule 7 of the High Court Rules. Even otherwise, in view of the statement made in para 7 of the counter affidavit, no grievance survives for consideration and the writ petition is consequently dismissed.