HIND MAZDOOR SABHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) THIS writ application has been filed by way of public interest litigation. From the averments made in the writ petition, it is clear that the writ petition has been filed by targeting a particular person, i.e. Managing Director of Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation alleging therein that his substantial post is of Secretary, Road Construction Department, Jharkhand but he is continuing to hold the charge of the Managing Director of Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation, which was given to him. in the year 2004 as stop gap arrangement and even after completion of three years he is continuing on the said post and all sorts of irregularities are being committed by him.

(3.) IN that very judgment the Supreme Court in paragraph -7 has held that though in Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and others , this Court held that in service matters PILs should not be entertained, the inflow of so -called PILs involving service matters continues unabated in the Courts and strangely are entertained. The least the High Courts could do is to throw them out on the basis of the said decision. In paragraph 12 of the Supreme Court has held that when a particular person is the object and target of a petition styled as PIL, the court has to be careful to see whether the attack in the guise of public interest is really intended to unleash a private vendetta, personal grouse or some other malafide object.