The court dismissed the public interest litigation filed challenging forgery of an educational certificate and seeking termination of services, holding PIL not maintainable in service matters, permitting alternative legal remedies. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 21
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1119 of 2019
Petitioner :- Balram Yadav Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhanshu Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kailash Singh Kushwaha
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
The petitioner has preferred this public interest litigation amongst other for the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent concerned to make proper inquiry and to take appropriate action against the forgery of the respondent no. 6 and his educational certificate of high school examination and to cancel the high school certificate of the year 2005.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent concerned to terminate the services of the respondent no. 6 from the post of driver.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri K.S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the second respondent.
The Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and others v. Jitendra Kumar Mishra and others, (1998) 7 SCC 273 , has held that public interest litigation is not maintainable in service matters. However, having due regard to nature of allegations, we leave it open to the petitioner to take recourse to such remedy which is available to him under law.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 24.5.2019 Digamber
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and others v. Jitendra Kumar Mishra and others, (1998) 7 SCC 273Referred¶9
Balram Yadav
State of U P
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
