HARSH ANUJ Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Public Interest Litigation the relief sought is for a general direction to the respondents to desist from using vehicles more than 15 years old on contract for transportation of bulk petroleum on the grounds of safety. It is alleged in paragraph 4 that the petitioner saw a vehicle coming out from the Sipara Depot emitting sparks. The driver was asked to stop and switch off the engine. The petitioner had seen the vehicle with his naked-eye that it was very old.

(2.) THE petitioner is stated to be an Advocate practicing before this Court. His name is mentioned in the cause list but none has appeared when the matter is called out. We find that the writ application is extremely vague in its pleadings. No number of the vehicle alleged to be 15 years old, with any dangerous condition specified in respect of the vehicle transporting bulk petroleum has been mentioned. The pleadings do not also mention the date of sighting or the number of the vehicle.

(3.) COUNTER affidavit adequately discloses that the respondents appear to be conscious of their own responsibility. Had the petitioner done his research before filing this application there may have been occasion for us to proceed further in the matter. In the nature of pleadings, we are not persuaded to start a roving enquiry. The application is dismissed.