Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Vakalatnama filed on behalf of opposite party No.2 by Sri Rajnish Kumar Singh, Advocate is taken on record.
Notice on behalf of opposite party No.1 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel.
In view of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice need not be issued to the private respondent Nos. 3 to 42.
Heard Sri Moti Lal Yadav, the petitioner in person.
The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
(a) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus directing Respondents No.1 & 2 to take appropriate decision, fix responsibility of the concerned officers/officials and other persons in the matter of allotment of plots in Ramnagar Housing Scheme, 2003 Aishbagh, Lucknow on the basis of report submitted by the then Deputy Secretary on 30.1.2009 and order passed thereon by the then Vice-Chairman of Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) on 6.02.2009;
(b) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus appointing a high level committee consisting of persons as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to make enquiry into the matter of allotment plots in Ramnagar Housing Scheme, 2003 and submit report to the Hon'ble Court within the time provided by the Hon'ble Court;
(c) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the State Government to take action against officers/officials/persons involved in the matter of allotment of plots in Ramnagar Housing Scheme, 2003 on the basis of report of the committee for taking appropriate legal action under criminal law and departmentally on the basis of such report;
(d) Issue such other writ or direction as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice; and
(e) Allow the petition with costs;
In this Public Interest Litigation petition, the petitioner has come forward with the allegation that certain allotments were made in Ramnagar Housing Scheme, 2003, Aishbagh, Lucknow by the opposite party No.2 without following due procedure in most arbitrary and illegal manner by extraneous consideration. As per own case of the petitioner, the said allotments were made in the year 2003. The averments in this regard have been made in para - 5 of the writ petition.
It is submitted that with respect to the allotment of plots under the said scheme, some enquiry was conducted in the year 2008-09. The enquiry report was submitted on 30.1.2009. However, no action was taken on the said enquiry report. It is also submitted that the concerning opposite parties be directed to hold an enquiry and take a final decision in this regard.
We have considered the submissions and gone through the record. The petitioner has approached this Court with an inordinate delay and laches which have not been explained in the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in this regard has submitted that as and when the petitioner has come to know about the alleged illegalities, he has come to the Court. We are not satisfied on this score.
We find that as per the own case of the petitioner, the alleged allotments under the said Scheme were made in the year 2003. Some enquiry may have been done in the year 2008-09. We have taken note of the fact that the petitioner has approached this Court now in the year 2021. We do not find any reason to grant indulgence at this belated stage.
The inordinate delay also does not inspire any confidence of bona fide on the part of the petitioner. The person aggrieved or socially spirited person in Public Interest Litigation is supposed to approach the Court at the first instance, particularly in exercise of its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is not a fit case for grant indulgence.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.1.2021 lakshman