IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No. 17720 of 2010 =================================================== Ashwani Kumar, S/o Late Durga Prasad, General Secretary, State Public Undertaking Employees Association, Bihar, Patna ..….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar, 2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna, 3. The Finance Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna, 4. The State of Jharkhand, Ranchi, 5. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, 6. The Finance Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi …… Respondents =================================================== APPEARANCE For the petitioner: Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, Advocate. For the State of Bihar: Mr. S.K. Ghosh, AAG II. For the State of Jharkhand: Mr. N.N. Ojha, Advocate. =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 28.10.2010. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed in public interest by one Ashwani Kumar, General Secretary, State Public Undertaking Employees Union, Bihar. At the outset we may note that the pleadings do not disclose whether the aforesaid Union is a registered Union and that the petitioner is the duly elected General Secretary of the Union or that the Union has authorized the petitioner to take out this petition in public interest. The petitioner espouses the claim of the deceased 2 employees of the Public Sector Undertakings of the State Government for parity of conditions of service with that of the government servants. The issue had been taken up by this Court in suo motu Public Interest Litigation in CWJC No. 11640 of 2003. A committee of retired Judge Justice Uday Sinha was constituted. Certain fund was provided by the State Government to the said committee for payment of the amounts of terminal benefits to the concerned employees. The committee had distributed the said amount amongst the claimants. Since then by order dated 17th September 2007 made by this Court (Coram : Justice Dr. J.N. Bhatt, CJ & Justice Kishore K. Mandal, J), the direction was issued to wind up `Justice Uday Sinha Committee’. The Bench proceeded to make the following order: “In view of the aforesaid direction, Justice Uday Sinha Committee shall stand wound up for the time being. Accordingly, the present petition at this stage will stand disposed of subject to the revival, if any.” It appears that the same subject matter was at large before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 488 of 2002 and Writ petition (Civil) No. 194 of 2003. The said Writ Petitions were disposed of on 09.08.2010 in the following terms: “The issues involved in these cases basically are legal issues. They will have to be gone into by the concerned High Courts. This Court has so far monitored the matter to its 3 best possible ability. In the circumstances, we request the High Court to examine these matters in the PIL and pass appropriate orders in these PILs as expeditiously as possible. The Registry is directed to forward copy of this order to the Registrar General of the High Court. The attention of the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court may be drawn to this Order. We request the High Court to consider the orders passed by this Court giving appropriate directions from time to time in these cases. We also direct the High Court to consider making interim payments to the affected persons including medical treatment.” Pursuant to the above order, the above referred CWJC No. 11640 of 2003 was placed before us. In view of the above order dated 17.09.2007 made by this Court and the order dated 09.08.2010 made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court; we had, under our order dated 31.08.2010, noted that no grievance had been made before us by any individual. We held that the cause of action did not survive and the legal issues raised had become academic. It was, however, observed that “any individual, if aggrieved, will have liberty to approach the appropriate forum.” Now, the present petition in public interest has been filed pursuant to the above order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. We have noticed that the petitioner has not disclosed material particulars about any aggrieved person. 4 The petitioner has annexed to the petition a statement containing names of certain employees and the dates on which they died. On the sparse material placed before the Court, we cannot presume that all those persons were aggrieved or that they were not paid their dues. In absence of semblance of relevant material we are unable to entertain this so called Public Interest Litigation. Under our order dated 31.08.2010 the aggrieved individuals have been reserved liberty to take out appropriate proceedings. We, therefore, do not entertain this Public Interest Litigation. The petition is dismissed in limine. Dilip ( R.M. Doshit, CJ ) ( Jyoti Saran, J )