Allahabad High Court Dismisses Defective Writ Petition Filed by Petitioner in Person

Court Imposes Costs on Petitioner for Challenging Contractual Appointment Extension Without Statutory Basis

In a recent judgment delivered by the Allahabad High Court, Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery dismissed a writ petition filed by Deepak Chowrasia, who appeared in person challenging the extension of his contractual appointment. The court highlighted the difficulties faced when dealing with defective petitions filed by individuals unaware of legal procedures and emphasized the importance of proper drafting and legal assistance.

The petitioner, Deepak Chowrasia, had challenged the extension of his contractual appointment while also questioning the selection process for regular appointments at the university. Chowrasia's petition was deemed defective due to multiple issues, including acting against his own interest by challenging the extension of his appointment and failing to implead other selected candidates in his petition. Furthermore, he had included the 'Selection Committee' as a respondent, which was identified as another procedural defect.

Justice Shamshery noted the repeated challenges faced by the court in handling cases where petitioners appear in person without adequate legal knowledge or assistance. Despite a patient hearing, the court observed that the interest of justice often suffers in such situations. The judgment pointed out that although there is no bar for petitioners to represent themselves, exceptions where individuals argue better than qualified advocates are rare.

The court also acknowledged the submission from the respondent's counsel that currently, there are no contractual appointments for the post of Lecturer at the university, and all appointments are made through a regular recruitment process. Furthermore, Chowrasia's reference to a Government Order was dismissed as it lacked statutory support, reinforcing that contractual appointees do not possess an indefeasible right to extension when regular appointments have been made.

The judgment underscored that referencing multiple judgments does not strengthen a case if the factual aspects are not favorable to the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the court imposed a cost of Rs. 5000 on Chowrasia, to be deposited in the District Legal Services Authority, Kanpur Nagar.

This case serves as a reminder of the challenges courts face with defective petitions and the necessity for petitioners to ensure proper legal representation to avoid adverse outcomes.

Bottom Line:

Petitioners appearing in person must ensure proper drafting and adherence to legal procedures to avoid defective petitions. Lack of proper assistance may lead to dismissal of petitions and imposition of costs.

Statutory provision(s): [No specific statutory provisions were cited as supporting the petitioner's case; the judgment highlighted procedural defects and lack of statutory backup for the petitioner's claims.]

Deepak Chowrasia v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2810692