HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 779 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Rahul Roshan Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri V. P. Nag, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for respondent no.5. 2. The present P.I.L., ostensibly filed in public interest, is for issuing a writ of mandamus commanding respondent nos.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against respondent no.5 and transfer him from Community Health Centre, Patti, Pratapgarh where he is alleged to be working since last 13 years. 3. A preliminary objection has been filed on behalf of respondent no.5 to the maintainability of the writ petition. It is stated that, in fact, the present petition is not in public interest, but adversarial in nature, filed at behest of one Dr. Ram Pratap Bhartiya, who could not get any relief in his writ petition. Petitioner no.2-Lal Bahadur Biswakarma has stated in his affidavit dated 31.07.2025, filed along with the preliminary objection that the petition was filed in his name without any consent from him. It is also stated that annexure nos. 2 and 3 filed along with the writ petition on letterheads of Member of Legislative Assembly, Patti, Pratapgarh are, in fact, fabricated documents. The alleged authors of the said letters have denied having written the same. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.5 submits that in the enquiry held on Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Roshan Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Adesh Srivastava, Amit Jaiswal Sanjay Kumar Verma And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Medical Health And Family Welfare Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) the basis of the complaint filed against respondent no.5 in relation to his owning a private hospital in the same area has not been found to be correct. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners while making oral submissions has submitted with great vehemence that in the report it has been found that respondent no.5 is having a private hospital in the same area. 6. After perusing the report, we find that the submission is not correct and, in fact, the report states that no hospital or nursing home was found running in the building belonging to respondent no.5. 7. As the writ petition relates to service matter and appears to be malicious, therefore, we decline to entertain the same, particularly at the behest of the petitioners, one of whom has even denied having joined the petition voluntarily. 8. The petition is accordingly dismissed with a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioners before the State Legal Services Authority within a week from today. September 26, 2025 akhilesh/- WPIL No. 779 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- AKHILESHWAR KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench