IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (PIL) No. 49/2011 Manoj Kumar Mishra & Another … Petitioners Versus Union of India & Others. … Respondents Mr. MS Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioners. Smt. Anjali Bhargava, Standing Counsel, for the respondents no. 1 & 2. Mr. Devesh Upreti, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. MC Pande, Advocate, for the respondent no. 3. Mr. JP Joshi, CSC, for the respondent no. 4. Date of order : 14.7.2011 Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) In the writ petition, purporting to be in public interest, it has been contended that there is a necessity for constitution of an appropriate body to regulate, register and license medial lab professionals having diploma called DLMT or degree called MLT. 2. In the body of the petition, there is not even a single whisper as to which organization or institution is awarding such diplomas or degrees. At the same time, there is not even a single whisper in the petition that obtaining of such diploma or degree has been recognized by the State as a condition for giving any Government appointment. 3. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the writ petitioner has not done his basic homework, required to be done before a writ petition in public interest is filed. We are, accordingly, constrained to dismiss the writ petition. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 14.7.2011 14.7.2011 Prabodh 2