Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:127247-DB

Court No. - 40

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1403 of

2023

Petitioner :- Crime Prevention Control Of India

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- R.K Singh Gaharwar

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pawan Kumar Singh,Vibhu Rai

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

1. Supplementary Affidavit as well as Amendment Application

filed today be taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Suresh Singh,

learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State

respondents and Shri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate

assisted by Shri Dhananjay Rai, Advocate holding brief of Shri

Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for Prayagraj Development Authority,

Prayagraj.

3. Petitioner namely Crime Prevention Control of India through

Shri Atul Rastogi, who claims to be National R.T.I. Officer, has

preferred the present Public Interest Litigation inter-alia with

following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent

no.4 not to conduct the lottery, which is going to be conducted on 09.06.2023 for allotment of

flats under Prime Minister Awas Yojna (Urban) without proper physical verification of the

objections filed by the persons, who have illegally and wrongly shown ineligible for

participating in the aforesaid lottery dated 09.06.2023.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to

properly verify the physical status of the persons, who have made objection before the

respondent no.4.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to take

appropriate actions against the concerned officers, who have given before false status of the

persons due to one reason and others, by which, they have illegally and wrongly shown

illegible for participating in the lottery, which is going to be conducted on 09.06.2023."

4. Shri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate and Shri Suresh

Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel raised

preliminary objection qua maintainability of the present public

interest litigation on the ground that petitioner has not disclosed

the particulars specially credentials as are required under Sub-rule

(3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court

Rules (Rules of Court, 1952) which was amended in the light of

the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State

of Uttaranchal vs Balwant Singh Chaufal & ors 2010 SC 2550.

Even the cause for filing the writ petition no more survives as the

allotment was made through lottery system on 09.06.2023 and

allotment letter was also issued to the allottees. In this backdrop,

he submits that once third party rights have already been created,

then the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of

non-joinder of parties also.

5. We have the occasion to peruse the record and finds substance in

the objection so raised by learned Senior Counsel as well as Shri

Suresh Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. Sub-

rule (3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court

Rules (Rules of Court, 1952) requires a person espousing a public

cause, to file an affidavit stating precisely, his credentials and the

public cause which is sought to be espoused. This is intended to

disclose to the Court, the full track record and bona fides of the

petitioner. The petitioner has to similarly disclose that he or she

has no personal or private interest in the matter and that there is no

authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court or High Courts

on the question raised. The last part of sub-rule (3-A) requires a

disclosure that the result of the litigation will not lead to any undue

gain to the petitioner or anyone associated with him, or any undue

loss to any person, body of persons or the State. The words which

have been used in sub-rule (3-A) are "undue gain"