Mohd. Rayees Ansari And Others vs State Of U.P.Thru.It'S Secy. And ...
2012 Latest Caselaw 2801 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 39
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 29427 of 2012
 
Petitioner :- Mohd. Rayees Ansari And Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.It'S Secy. And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Mahendra Ram Maurya,Vimal Kumar Kushwaha
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.

This writ petition appears to be utter abuse of the process of court. Petitioners are home guards. They pray that Home Guards Rules may be declared to be ultra virus as they are violative of Articles 21, 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India (Para-1 of the writ petition). Petitioners are appointed under the same Rules and if the Rules are declared ultra virus petitioners will also fall down. However, in Writ Petition No.18839 of 2012 decided on 16.04.2012, State Government has been directed to constitute an Expert Committee and take appropriate decision qua the claim of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the claim of these petitioners is also exactly the same as was the claim of the petitioners in the said writ petition. If it is so then there was absolutely no need to file this writ petition. Filing of this writ petition is abuse of the process of the court. If the Expert Committee takes some decision and consequently Rules are framed or amended they will apply to all similarly situate home-guards. It is inconceivable that such Rules or amendment in the Rules would apply only to those home-guards who file writ petition.

Accordingly, writ petition being utterly misconceived and utter abuse of judicial process is dismissed. It is directed that no other home-guard shall file writ petition for the same relief. However it is clarified that if some decision is taken by the Expert Committee and Rules are amended thereupon as per direction dated 16.04.2012 given in the earlier writ petition, the same would be applicable to all similarly situate home-guards irrespective of fact whether they have filed the writ petition or not.

Order Date :- 9.7.2012

NLY