Court No. - 34
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 6521 of 2008 Petitioner :- Kripa Shankar Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- P.K. Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anubhav Shukla,D.S.M. Tripathi,H.P.Yadav,Krishnaji Khare,P.N.Tripathi,Ram Shiromani Shukla,Rama Shankar Shukla
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
1. Called in revise. None appeared on behalf of petitioner. However, we ourselves have perused the record.
2. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to 6 to produce entire records in relation to the appointment of respondent no. 9 to 30 and also to produce other documents which are related to the institution namely Inter College Newahria District Jaunpur.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring the appointments of the respondent no. 9 to 30 nonest and void under law and may recover entire amount of the salaries so paid to them by State exchequer and a full fledged enquiry be conducted in the matter.
(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no. 5 to 6 to stop the disbursement of the salary in favour of respondents no. 9 to 30.
(d) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no. 5 to 6 to recover the public money taken by the Principal (respondent no. 9) in the name of the construction of the building and same may deposit in the account of guardian funds of the said Institution."
3. However, we ourselves have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioner is not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for.
4. Moreover, it appears that either the cause of action no more survives or that petitioner has lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for petitioner is absent.
5. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 AK