Jitendra Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies and4 Ors.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023WPIL/7818/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL sought directions to conduct an enquiry and lodge an FIR against the District Supply Officer, Lucknow, for alleged irregularities. The High Court rejected the petition, noting vague charges, lack of a named accused, and the petitioners adequate criminal law remedies.

What did the court decide?

Directions for enquiry and FIR were refused; petition rejected.

Jitendra Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 7818 of 2014

¶3

Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supplies And4 Ors

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Satish Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

None appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this Public Interest Litigation.

¶7

Shri Anand Singh, learned Standing Counsel for Staterespondents is present.

¶8

The instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner- Jitendra Kumar Gupta with the following prayers:-

¶9

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite parties to get conduct enquiry against the work, conduct and performance of the opposite party No.5 i.e. District Supply Officer Lucknow by constituting a committee or from any independent agency or C.B.C.I.D. so that the beneficiary could get justice.

¶10

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite parties after conducting enquiry against the opposite party No. 5 to lodge the First Information Report against him.

¶11

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite parties to ensure the public persons for compliance of orders passed by this Hon'ble Court."

¶12

The instant writ petition has been filed purportedly in public interest seeking issuance of a direction for conducting enquiry against the then District Supply Officer, Lucknow and to lodge a First Information Report against him. It has been vaguely alleged in the writ petition that the District Supply Officer,

¶13

Lucknow had committed irregularities and was involved in corruption. However, the District Supply Officer has been impleaded by designation and no natural person has been impleaded in the writ petition as an opposite party. There is no allegation that any person had demanded any bribe from the petitioner. A writ petition cannot be entertained on the basis of such vague allegations.

¶14

So far as the prayer for lodging of the First Information Report against the District Supply Officer, Lucknow is concerned, the writ petition for the same purpose cannot be entertained as the petitioner could have directly lodged a First Information Report in case he had information that a cognizable offence had been committed by any person and in case of non-registration of his First Information Report, he has adequate remedy under the criminal law.

¶15

Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly rejected .

¶16

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 Arnima

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jitendra Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies and4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies and4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Masarrat Husain Vs Union of India through Secretary Culture New Delhi and Others

Moti Lal Yadav and Anr. P.I.L. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secretary Animal and Husbandary and Others

Kishan Goswami Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko. and Others

State of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. Govt. of U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another Vs Anju Katiyar

Santosh Kumar Shukla 3531 S/S2000 Vs Syndicate Bank through Its G. Manager Industrial and Ors.

Dinesh Kumar Maurya S/O Mannu Lal Maurya and Anr. Vs Chancellor Lucknow University Lucknow and Ors.