RAVINDRA NATH RAI Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition the order dated 21.6.1989 has been challenged wheredy D.I.O.S., Ghazipur has sent a letter to the Authorised Controller, Jharkhandey Mahadeo Rastriya Inter College, Sher Karimuddipur, post office Karimuddipur, district Ghazipur whereby Sri Suresh Prasad Pandey was allowed to work as an Assistant Clerk (Librarian) from 1st July, 1987 and the petitioner's name has not been mentioned in the order.

(2.) It is settled proposition of law that a party has to plead the case and produce/adduce sufficient evidence to substantiate his submissions made in the petition and in case the pleadings are not complete, the Court is under no obligation to entertain the pleas. [Vide Bharat Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 1988 SC 2181; Larsen and Toubro Ltd. v. State of Gujarat and Ors., AIR 1998 SC 1608; National Building Construction Corporation v. S. Raghunathan and Ors., AIR 1998 SC 2779; Ram Narain Arora v. Asha Rani and Ors., (1999) 1 SCC 141; Chitra Kumari v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 2001 SC 1237 and State of U.P. and Ors. v. Chandra Prakash Pandey, AIR 2001 SC 1298].

(3.) In Atul Castings Ltd. v. Bawa Gurvachan Singh, AIR 2001 SC 1684, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under : "The findings in the absence of necessary pleadings and supporting evidence cannot be sustained in law."