Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Narendra Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru' Revenue Deptt. & Ors. - PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. 58348 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2297 (2 September 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.32

Public Interest Litigation No.58348 of 2005

Narendra Singh vs. The State of U.P. & others.

Hon'ble S. Rafat Alam, J.

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J.

This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by one Narendra Singh as Public Interest Litigation with the grievance that respondent no.4 has secured appointment as Lekhpal in the year 1989 by furnishing false information that he had passed high school in first division, though, in fact, he had passed that examination in second division.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the fact of producing wrong marksheet was detected a departmental proceeding was initiated against respondent no.4 in the year 1998 and ultimately he was also dismissed from service.  However, respondent no.4 challenged the aforesaid order of dismissal before the U.P. Public Service Tribunal.  The learned Tribunal after hearing the parties set aside the aforesaid order with liberty to the department to hold fresh inquiry in accordance with law.  It is contended that the aforesaid order of Tribunal was passed on 17.10.2003 but till date the State-respondent has not proceeded in the matter by initiating the proceeding.

We are of the view that the grievance raised in the petition does not pertain to public interest and as such this petition is not maintainable as Public Interest Litigation.  It is settled legal position that PIL cannot be used as a tool to wreck vengeance and release vendetta unless the petitioner is able to satisfy the real and genuine public interest involved in the litigation by giving concrete or credible material.  PIL, merely on vague allegations, cannot be entertained, unless a person seeking relief, under the garb of Public Interest Litigation, establishes that the grievance raised is genuinely concerned with public interest.  

In the instant case, the petitioner has failed to satisfy us that it has not been filed with any oblique motive and, therefore, we are of the considered view that the grievance of the petitioner and prayer sought in this petition does not pertain to public interest and as such, we dismiss the petition.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.