VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. This writ petition, which is essentially in two parts qua the causes of action and reliefs claimed, can be in one way disposed of by a very short judgment, because, the first part/ aspect and the reliefs claimed with respect thereto of challenge to the 2010 tender process of Railways for setting up manufacturing units for diesel and electric locomotive tenders has become infructuous because the tender process has been cancelled by the Ministry over one and a half years back, and the second part/aspect of the related reliefs of petitioner’s claim as a whistle blower for grant of security to her by the State is without any basis whatsoever and hence cannot be granted. The judgment however will have to be a bit prolix in view of the aspect given below, including the aspect that petitioner has caused 28 judges of this Court to recuse from hearing the matter and that there have been over 90 hearings in the writ petition and the interim applications mostly filed by the petitioner.

2. Let us at this stage turn to the relief clauses of the writ petition:-

“1. Summon the records of Respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5 on whistle-blower complaints made by the Petitioner and after examining the records and hearing the Respondents, issue a writ of mandamus to Respondent 4 directing that Respondent 7 be disqualified and Respondent Nos. 1, 6 and 7 be black-listed from the Diesel and Electric Locomotive Tenders (Global RFQ No.2010/ME (Proj)/4/Marhoura/RFQ and RFQ No. 2010/Elect. (Dev0440/1(1).

2. Issue writs of mandamus to Respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5 directing them to respond to and act upon the said whistle-blower complaints in accordance with law.

3. Direct that Respondent No.2 inquire into commission of criminal offences (including forgery, bribery and public corruption) arising out of the Petitioner’s whistle-blower complaints and direct prosecution of GE employees and government officials and public servants found involved and complicit.

4. Enforce and protect the right to life of the Petitioner and direct that the Petitioner be provided full protection and safety and be immediately relocated to a safe house.

5. Pass such other and further orders as Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

3(i) The first three reliefs pertain to the 2010 tenders process of the Railways for setting up diesel and electric locomotive manufacturing units at Madhepura and Marhowra. A reading of the first three reliefs prayed shows that the petitioner claims that respondent nos. 1, 6 and 7, and which are the G.E. Electric Company and its sister companies (hereinafter jointly referred to as G.E); be disqualified from the subject tenders and G.E. be also black listed. Petitioner seeks the related reliefs that respondent nos. 2, 4 and 5 i.e Central Vigilance Commission (CVC); Indian Railways, and Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) respectively, act upon the complaints of the petitioner with respect to the petitioner’s claims of forgery, corruption etc with respect to the aforesaid tenders.

(ii) The fourth relief that the petitioner seeks is that the petitioner alleges that her life is in danger on account of her acting as a whistle-blower qua the aforesaid tenders, and therefore, she be provided full protection and safety by the government including by immediate relocation to a safe house.

4. On 31.5.2013, the date fixed in the case, a Division Bench of this Court recorded the statement made by Sh. Rajeeve Mehra, the then Additional Solicitor General (ASG) that the tenders in respect of which the main part of the writ petition pertained to had been cancelled and the entire process has restarted from the beginning. The writ petition therefore at this stage itself ordinarily ought to have been brought to an end, inasmuch as, once the tender process itself had been cancelled, there did not survive any major aspect or issue, except of course the self-serving claim of the petitioner that G.E be black listed on account of allegations made by her of forgery and c