01Facts
The petitioner, an RTI activist, filed a Public Interest Litigation seeking judicial intervention for the expeditious and time-bound consideration and disposal of pending complaints against 45 IAS officers. He sought disclosure of the status of the complaints and investigations, prescription of timelines for their disposal, and initiation and completion of disciplinary proceedings under the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969
¶ 2The State submitted that appropriate action had already been taken regarding the complaints and that the relief sought no longer survived, rendering the petition infructuous
¶ 3Appearing in person through video conferencing, the petitioner accepted the State’s submission and agreed that no further relief remained for consideration
¶ 402Issues
i.1. Whether the petition had become infructuous in view of the subsequent action taken by the respondents and the redressal of the petitioner’s grievance
¶ 3, 6–7ii.2. Whether any further effective relief or adjudication on the merits of the complaints against the IAS officers survived for consideration
¶ 6–803Law Applied
The Court applied the procedural principle that a writ petition becomes infructuous where the grievance forming its foundation has been substantially redressed and no effective relief remains to be granted
¶ 7The Court also followed the settled restraint that, once proceedings are disposed of as infructuous, the Court need not adjudicate the merits of the underlying dispute; accordingly, it expressly declined to express any opinion on the complaints or proceedings initiated pursuant to them
¶ 8Although the petitioner referred to the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, the Court did not determine or apply any substantive provision of those Rules
¶ 204Reasoning
The principal relief sought concerned alleged inaction and delay in dealing with complaints against the IAS officers
¶ 6The respondents represented that appropriate steps had already been taken, thereby addressing the basis of the PIL
¶ 3The petitioner did not dispute that position and expressly acknowledged that no further relief survived
¶ 4In light of the redressal of the grievance and the absence of any surviving effective relief, the Court held that continuing adjudication was unnecessary and treated the petition as infructuous
¶ 705Holding
The Court dismissed WPPIL No. 69 of 2021 as having become infructuous
¶ 8It clarified that the dismissal did not constitute any opinion on the merits of the complaints against the concerned IAS officers or on any proceedings initiated pursuant to them
¶ 8Original Court PDF
RAJ KUMAR MISHRAvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
