: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2009 OF 2008 Mr. P.A. Shivashankar. .. Petitioner Vs The President of India, New Delhi. .. Respondent -- Shri P.A. Shivshankar, petitioner-in-person. Shri R.B. Raghuwanshi, ASG along with Shri D.N. Salvi for the Union of India. Ms Usha Kejariwal, APP for the State. -- CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & S.A. BOBDE, J DATE : 8TH OCTOBER, 2008 P.C. We have heard the Petitioner appearing in person. In this Petition, the Petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has made the following prayers: “a. That direct the respondent to invoke Article 356 against Union and State Governments functioning in the terriotory of India got no majority in the House of Legislature. b. That direct the respondent that during the course of dissolved Legislature by expiry of its terms or invoking Article 356, the Government : 1 : shall be functioned in accordance to Article 356(1) (a) of the constitution. c. That declare the Minister is not entitled to vote in the House of Legislature. d. That declare that there shall be only two parties to contest the election for Legislature. e. That declare the Care-taker Government is illegal. f. That declare the Prime Minister, Speaker, Ministers and 2 foreigners voted in parliament on 22.07.08 are convicted to 3 years rigorous imprisonment in jail. g. That any other directions/declarations that deemd fit and proper for this Court during the course of the case.” 2. At the very outset, we may notice that the Petitioner is a resident of Coimbatore and has filed this Writ Petition in this Court praying for a direction to the respondent to invoke Article 356 against the Union of India as well as State Government to dissolve the House of Legislature and certain other prayers as quoted above. We are afraid whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this petition and in any case this public interest litigation is without any merit and substance. We find that this petition is an : 1 : abuse of process of law, misconceived and is based on no averments. 3. We accordingly dismiss the Petition. However, taking a liberal view, we do not impose costs. CHIEF JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE, J