KRISHNAJEE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been preferred mainly on the ground that initially the petitioner was selected on the post of a Constable, but it appears that certain gross irregularities were found out in the selection process and, therefore, there was termination of selection and appointment of candidates mainly on the ground of fraud and, therefore, the present petition has been preferred, as the services of the petitioner has been terminated.

(2.) HAVING heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that: -

(3.) LOOKING to this document, it appears that in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the case of the petitioner cannot be decided without laying evidence. The evidence must be laid by the petitioner and they must be cogent and convincing one for grant of relief, as prayed for in the memo of present petition and, therefore, I hereby dismiss this writ petition on the ground of disputed question of facts, involved in the present writ petition and the fraud, as alleged by the petitioner, in the original register and similarly the respondents are also alleging fraud, which has been committed either by the petitioner or at the behest of the petitioner, so that the petitioner can get undue benefit of the same. In these set of circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner is not remediless. Ubi jus ibi remedium. Writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction. In these set of facts, especially where evidence is required to be laid to dispel the clouds of fraud, I am not exercising powers conferred upon this Court under extraordinary jurisdiction.