The court dismissed a public interest litigation challenging irregular salary payments and alleged misappropriation of government funds. Holding that the complainant has a very narrow locus to challenge service matters, the court declared the writ petition non-maintainable.
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. - 1191 of 2019
Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Janam Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
The writ petition raises the grievance in respect of the payment of salary to respondent no.5.
The petitioner amongst others sought the following relief:
"(i) Issue3 a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to initiate enquiry against the respondent No. 5 in which circumstances she got two salaries/stypen on the same time by the respondent No.5.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and 2 to take action against respondent No.5 and other officials related in misappropriation of Government Fund which was given to the respondent No.5 on two places."
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 in service matters the locus to challenge by a complainant is very narrow. The said decision has been followed by the Supreme Court in the cases of Girjesh Shrivastava and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, (2010) 10 SCC 707 and Hari Bansh Lal v. Sahodar Prasad Mahto and others, (2010) 9 SCC 655 .
The writ petition is not maintainable on the above ground. The petitioner may take recourse to such remedy which is available under the law.
The writ petition is dismissed.
It is made clear that the dismissal of this PIL shall not cause any prejudice to the contentions made by the petitioner.
Order Date :- 24.5.2019 MAA/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging an irregularity in salary payment is maintainable in service matters given the narrow locus standi to complain about intra-establishment employment disputes.
Whether the present public interest litigation challenging dual salary payment and misappropriation of government funds is maintainable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and others v. Jitendra Kumar Mishra and othersFollowed¶9
(1998) 7 SCC 273 · Who else cites this
Girjesh Shrivastava and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and othersFollowed¶9
(2010) 10 SCC 707 · Who else cites this
Hari Bansh Lal v. Sahodar Prasad Mahto and othersFollowed¶9
(2010) 9 SCC 655 · Who else cites this
Anil Kumar Pal
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
