A person who engages in reprehensible and debased conduct, and who abuses and misuses his official position, is debarred from seeking equitable relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.

1. - 'Sex', 'Morality' and 'law', the traingular complex of this judgment, is an spontaneous result of the unusual protest and vehemence at the Bar of counsel of petitioner that the High Court cannot refuse to give relief to the petitioner even though he acted like a "sex starved vulture" in a Railway station waiting room, while putting the robes of a Railway Ticket Collector on duty and, exhibited debased and reprehensible conduct, by making the lonely lady passenger his prey, for satisfying his lust and angary of sex, by committing sexual intercourse after bolting the door from inside and putting the light off, both of room and the minimum ethics and morality, betraying the saying that "even birds have got seasons" and "dacoits a code of ethics". This is one sentence genesis of this writ petition based on technical violation of the Railway Service rules for dismissal notice of the petitioner, and, the pivot of reasons of its rejection in liminie, even though the petitioner had technically a plausible case for consideration.

2. "Law" as observed by 'Morris Cohen' is a science of social instrument, its main object being to establish socio economic justice and remove the existing imbalance in the socioeconomic structure.

3. The dynamics of law has never been more eloquently described then by the Brinadaranyako Parishad. "Law" says the Upnishad is the "King of Kings, for more powerful and rigid than they. Nothing can be migther than law, by whose aid as by that of the highest monarch, even the weak may prevail over the strong.

4. Yajnyavalkya who came much after Manu divides Dharam Shastra into Achara or ritual, Vyavahara or jurisprudence and Prayaschitta or expitation.

5. In the Vedic period between 4000 to 1000 B.C. Srautasutras between 800 B.C., to 400 B.C. Dharamsatras between 600 B.C., to 300 B.C. Arthasastra of Kautilya between 300 B.C., to 100 A.D., Manu's concept of law between 200 B.C. to 100 A.D. Yajnvavalkya between 100 A.D.' to 300 A-D., Katyayanasmriti between 400 to 1500 A.D., Jimutvahan between 1100 to 1150 A.D, Nandapandita between 1590 to 1630 AD., Nirnayasindhu between 1610 to 1640 A.D Vyavaharamayukha between 1615 to 1645 and Dharamsindhu between 1790 A.D., all have got a common Golden thread of laws, having been made, interpreted or, enunicated undar the various inames at.d branches of "Dharma", being based, on, bedrock and foundation of "Morality".

6. In the above ancient back ground of concept of law, the Court has to now consider its legal duty in the administration of Justice under the present Constitution and the various legislations and the codified law.

7. Are we to convert temples' of justice into high per technical legal gymanastic clubs for display of legal gimmics to protect, immoral traffic and immoral acts? Are we to Hold that law is blind ' and be raft and devoid of Morality? Are, we to provide legal umbrella and reinstate, an, officer, who being mad with agery and lust for sex, converts Railway waiting room into a brothel, and instead of checking Railway tickets, exploits a lonely female sex in the room by, satisfying his immoral, animal instinct?

8. These are a few serious legal cum sociological questions arising from submissions of Mr. Singhvi; that since I, am sitting as a Judge in a Court of law, I should not consider the morality of the case and if I do so I would concert "Law Court", into "Moral Court", which I cannot do.

9. The answer is very simple. Law cannot be devoid of morality. Law is trade and enforced to ensure morality. Morality is inseparable from law and when even the contracts against public policy and morality are void, legislatures' cannot make laws against public morality. Courts of law are never immoral Courts' and would never interpret law against morality. Courts of law are proverbially "temples of justice" and neither any temple nor justice call exist against morality, and without morality. Morality and law, though not synonymous are complimentary and supplementary br