Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12377 of 2024 Petitioner :- U.P. Panchayat Raj Gramin Safai Karmchari Sangh Thru. President Gopal Saran Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj Deptt. Lko. U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rama Kant Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Shubham Shukla holding brief of Sri Rama Kant Dixit for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the respondents. 2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner i.e. Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Gramin Safai Karmchari Sangh has approached this Court with following prayers:- "(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature MANDAMUS commanding the opposite party no.3 to ensure the strict action against the opposite party no.6 in pursuance of the letter dated 01/07/2024, 26/09/2024 written by the opposite party no.5 and also the letter dated 06/09/2024 written by Block Development Officer, Shivpur, District Bahraich to him. (II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature MANDAMUS commanding the opposite party no.3 to ensure the strict compliance of the transfer policy dated 11/06/2024." 3. It has been stated that the President of Assistant Development Officer, Panchayat Union made a complaint on 6.4.2024 against opposite party No.6 stating that he is making hindrance in getting the salaries /family pension and other service dues of the members of pensioner's union and their dependents and accordingly prayer has been made for a direction to opposite party No.3 to ensure strict action against opposite party No.6. 4. At the outset, a query was put to learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the present writ petition is in the nature of public interest to which he has stated that public interest petition would be maintainable in service matters also and in this regard he has relied upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Pratap Singh Bist Vs. The Director, Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi and others, passed in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.41779/2023 decided on 3.11.2023 wherein it has been stated that as to whether a public interest petition is not, at all, maintainable in service matter is a debatable issue and the question has been kept open to be gone into in appropriate case. 5. Learned Additional Chief Standing counsel has opposed the writ petition and stated that as per the settled law of the Supreme Court public interest petition in service matters would not be maintainable. It was further stated that if any of the employees of the petitioner union was aggrieved by non- payment of salaries or with regard creating hindrance in getting family pension and other service benefits, it is always open for such employee to either approach higher authorities concerned or to themselves avail the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It was further stated that only a representation was given on 7.11.2024. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions, it is noticed that no relief has been sought by the petitioner for himself but as a measure of public interest the present writ petition has been filed. The settled law as per the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Duryodhan Sahu and others Vs. Jitendra Kumar Mishra and others, (1998) 7 SCC 273 is that no public interest petition would be maintainable in service matters. There is no doubt that till date there is no judgment contrary to the aforesaid judgment of Supreme Court nor shown on behalf of the petitioner by which it could be stated that the said law, as determined by Supreme Court in the case of Duryodhan Sahu (Supra), has been overruled or is no longer a good law. Even otherwise, looking into the complaint made by the petitioner Union on 7.11.2024 there are only vague allegations as no name of a single employee, who is aggrieved by the action/inaction of respondent No.6 has been stated. In the said circumstances on the basis of vague allegations without disclosing any concrete evidence against the employee concerned, no such direction can be issued by this Court. Even otherwise, the present writ petition is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court and a perusal of the writ petition also indicates that only vague and general allegations have been levelled against respondent No.6. 7. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that present writ petition being a public interest petition, would not be maintainable in service matters and the manner in which the petitioner - association has raised grievance where there is no specific allegation against respondent No.6, no direction can be given to any authority to proceed in the matter. As such, the petition being devoid of merits is dismissed with a cost of Rs.1000/- to be deposited in the library fund of Oudh Bar Association within next two weeks. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 2.1.2025/RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench