Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 200874 (ALL)

AJAY KUMAR RAI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

WPIL/3223/2025 · 2025-10-14

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3223 of 2025 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. This petition, purportedly in public interest, has been filed by the petitioner, who is President of Combined Bar Association, Tehsil Seorai, District Ghazipur. 2. Submissions have been made that the petitioner, on becoming the President, came to know that in the record, there were several irregularities committed by the respondents and, therefore, he has sought enquiry into the matter, however, the enquiry has been conducted by the Lekhpal, whereas the allegations were against the authorities higher than the Lekhpal and, therefore, the enquiry in this regard be ordered to be conducted. 3. A perusal of the petition indicates that the petitioner is representing several parties and has made allegations pertaining to the documents being forged for the purpose of seeking relief in the pending matters, however, instead of the parties establishing their case/seeking relief from the competent Court, the petitioner moved a representation before the District Magistrate, inter alia, indicating that on account of actions of the respondents, there have been disputes between the lawyers and their clients and, therefore, an enquiry in this regard be conducted. 4. Going through the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any cause of public interest involved in the present petition, that too, at the instance of the petitioner, who is representing certain parties and has made allegations in the proceedings pending before the competent Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Mishra, Nagendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Seema Agarwal (S.C.) Ajay Kumar Rai .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and 5 others .....Respondent(s) forum, apparently, with a view to get the support from the said allegations, seeking holding of enquiry. 5. Filing of the petition for the said purpose cannot be countenanced. The same is, therefore, dismissed, leaving it open to the aggrieved parties, if any, to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. October 15, 2025 P.Sri./Jyotsana WPIL No. 3223 of 2025 2 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) Digitally signed by :- PUNEET SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad