Dismissed¶18

Rishiraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2025WRIA/3044/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Service-side writ (Allahabad HC, Lucknow Bench) on handling of anonymous/frivolous complaints against an employee; mandamus sought for constitution of enquiry committee; G.O. dated 10.04.2012 (No.13/1/97-ka1/2012) to be followed before any enquiry; dismissal for want of pending complaint and absence of cause of action; petition based on mere apprehension not entertainable; State of U.P., Home Department; Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; 19.3.2025; 2025:AHC-LKO:15816.

What did the court decide?

The petition is based on a mere apprehension rather than any concrete grievance; since no fresh complaint is currently pending against the petitioner, no specific directions can be issued to the respondents, the relief sought cannot be granted, and the petition stands dismissed. ¶18

Rishiraj Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15816

¶2

Court No. - 18

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3044 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Rishiraj Singh

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shubham Shukla,Rama Kant Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 6.

¶8

2. Through this petition the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

¶9

"PRAYER-

¶10

Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-

¶11

i. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of MANDAMUS, thereby commanding the opposite party no. 1 and 2 to ensure to constitute an appropriate committee in order to properly enquire the frivolous complaints made against the petitioner and to punish the guilty persons.

¶12

ii. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of MANDAMUS, thereby directing the opposite party no. 1 and 2 to ensure that G.O. dated 10.04.2012(No.13/1/97-ka1/2012) (Annexure No 8 to this what Petition) must be followed in each and every complaint made against the petitioner prior making any enquiry against him.

¶13

iii. Such any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of the Petitioner, in the interest of justice.

¶14

Iv. Allow the writ petition with cost in favour of the petitioner.".

¶15

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier, in the past, seven anonymous complaints have been made against the petitioner in which the petitioner has been exonerated. He is praying for mandamus commanding the respondent nos.1 and 2 to ensure to constitute appropriate Committee in order to properly enquire the frivolous complaint made against the petitioner.

¶16

4. Per contra, learned Standing counsel has submitted that no fresh complaint is pending against the petitioner. As of now the petitioner has no cause of action to approach this Court. The petition has been filed on mere apprehension for which a writ cannot be entertained.

¶17

5. Perused the record.

¶18

6. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that the petition is based on a mere apprehension rather than any concrete grievance. Since, no fresh complaint is currently pending against the petitioner, no specific directions can be issued to the respondents. Consequently, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted, and the petition stands dismissed.

¶19

7. Needless to say that authorities shall follow the procedure prescribed by the State in treating any new complaint in future.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rishiraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishiraj Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Saurabh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Sudhakar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

Brijesh Kumar Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Anil Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical Health Family Welfare and Medical Edu. Lko and 3 Others

Priti Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Ofchild Development and Nutrition Lko. and 4 Others

Tribhuvan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. U.P.