Jagat Singh Martolia And Ors. ... vs Union Of India & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1784 UK

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                   AT NAINITAL

                 Writ Petition (PIL) No. 81 of 2022

Jagat Singh Martolia and Ors.                     .....Petitioners
                           Versus
Union of India & Ors.                             .....Respondents


Present:
      Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, the learned counsel for the petitioners.
      Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, the learned Standing Counsel for Union of
      India.
      Mr. Vikas Pande, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent
      no. 10.

                     Date of hearing : 15.06.2022

Coram:        Sri S.K. Mishra, ACJ.
              Sri R.C. Khulbe, J.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court made the following judgment: (Per: Sri S.K.Mishra, ACJ.)

This public interest litigation is initiated at the behest of the some elected representatives like Member of Zila Panchayat etc. The grievance of the petitioner is that the opposite party/company specially respondent no. 4 has collected money from several investors and are not returning the same, therefore, the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ or order directing respondent no. 4 to 8 to submit the entire records related to the accounts of investors and entire State of Uttarakhand before this Court and issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent no. 4 and its subsidiary societies to start the repayment of money of the investors. However, it is apparent from the record that though the petitioner said that he has received several complaints from different individuals of Pithoragarh and Almora but not a single complaint has been filed in the writ application. Moreover, the

document that has been prepared by the petitioner are all self serving documents being prepared in hand on a paper and not a single copy of the receipt has been filed in the writ application to show that actually respondent no. 4 has received money from any of the respondent of Pithoragarh and Almora for the purpose of creating saving deposit or any other financial purpose.

2. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that this is a speculative PIL and there is no merit in the same.

3. Hence, the writ petition (PIL) stands dismissed.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, ACJ.)

(Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J.)

PV