A public interest litigation filed by an advocate was dismissed for lack of prima facie grounds and credible research, as the petition was based solely on a Right to Information response without material allegations.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:75937-DB
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 975 of 2024
Petitioner :- Pradeep Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Avas U.P. Lko. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ms. Vineeta Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner.
Counsel for Respondent :- Sri Gopal Kumar Srivastava learned Standing counsel, Sri Shailendra Singh Chauhan learned counsel for the opposite party no.3.
Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
further submission that he was investigating other constructions also and would take action in due course, shows a total lack of any creditable research on part of the petitioner before filing the present Public Interest Litigation and therefore, the manner in which the petition has been filed, the same cannot be entertained.
Order Date :- 19.11.2024 Harshita/Asheesh
(Jaspreet Singh, J.) (Arun Bhansali, CJ.)
Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition filed by a lawyer based on a singular RTI response without credible research to question a specific construction should be entertained.
Pradeep Singh
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Avas U.P. Lko. And 3 Others
Arun Bhansali
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
