AMITABH THAKUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition, which purports to be in public interest, is by two petitioners. The first petitioner is a serving officer in the Indian Police Service and has stated that he has worked in the State Intelligence Organization. The second petitioner, who is the spouse of the first petitioner, has stated that she is a social activist. The reliefs which the petitioners seek are as follows:

(2.) THE affidavit in support of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been deposed to by the second petitioner on behalf of the first petitioner as well, and it has been stated that the contents of various paragraphs in the petition are true to her personal knowledge. The first petitioner has argued the petition in person.

(3.) AT the hearing of the petition, a preliminary objection has been raised to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioners are meddlesome interlopers who have a track record of filing successive petitions purportedly in public interest. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India has placed on record information which he has downloaded from the official website of the High Court at the Lucknow Bench which indicates that in 2010 the second petitioner had filed seven petitions; in 2011 ten petitions or, as the case may be, proceedings, and in 2012 twenty seven proceedings. In 2013, as many as 65 proceedings either by way of writ petitions, contempt petitions or revisions have been filed. A compilation has been placed on record containing diverse orders passed by this Court.