All India Independent Lawyer''s Forum vs Sri. I.C. Thakur and Others

The Petitioner, All India Independent Lawyer''s Forum, Ranchi, prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents, specially Deputy Secretary, Department of Cabinet Secretariat, Government Bihar, Patna (Respondent No. 1) and Secretary, Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Respondent No. 2) to obey an order said to have been issued by Hon''ble the President of India vide his Secretariat Letter No. 3828 dated 24.7.1991, the contents of which are not known to it.

This writ application was placed under the heading "For Admission" before Om Prakash and A.N. Chaturvedi, JJ. on 3rd December, 1991. Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal, the President of the Petitioner, was heard in person. Government Pleader No. 1 representing the Respondents was also heard. The learned Judges dismissed the writ application by order, dated 3rd December, 1991, holding that there is no merit in it.

The Petitioner filed review petition. The said petition was registered as Civil Review No. 45 of 1991 (R) and allowed by order dated 9th March, 1992 on the ground that the writ petition was dismissed in limine without giving reasons.

Om Prakash and A.N. Chaturvedi, JJ. who were then holding Court by way of Circuit at Ranchi are not available and the writ application has been placed before us under the heading "For Admission".

Mr. Kamal, the President of the Petitioner, appears in person and submits that right of information is a fundamental right of a citizen and, accordingly, the Petitioner has a right to know what action has been taken by Respondents No. 1 and 2 in regard to the grievances made by him before Hon''ble the President of India who in his turn forwarded the same to Respondents No. 1 and 2. Despite repeated requests, nothing is being furnished to the Petitioner by Respondents No. 1 and 2 and hence this writ petition.

Learned J.C. to G.P. I submits that the Petitioner has got no cause of action to move this Court inasmuch as he could again request the Hon''ble President of India to furnish a copy of the letter sent to Respondents No. 1 and 2. Normally, the grievances made before the President of India are being forwarded to the lower authorities on a printed form in a routine way. There is no merit in this writ petition and it be dismissed.

We have given serious thought in regard to relief claimed by the Petitioner. No provision has been brought to our notice as to whether the Law Secretary of this State, who is of the rank of a District Judge, is competent to take any appropriate action against the Judges of this Court even if we assume that the claim of the Petitioner is correct. In paragraph 26 of the writ petition, the Petitioner has asserted that the Hon''ble President of India is in the process of ascertaining facts.

In this view of the matter, we do not see what purpose, any reply by the Law Secretary to the Petitioner, can serve.

From the averments made in the writ petition, it does not appear that the Petitioner ever made any request before the President of India in regard to the alleged grievances made by it.

It is a settled law that this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India does not decide an academic question or issue futile writs.

In the aforementioned view of the matter, we do not feel inclined to exercise our discretion. We, accordingly, dismiss it. No cost.