A.P.Sahi, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Kumar Dubey, learned Counsel for the Respondents.
(2.) The petitioner has alleged large scale irregularities in para 9 of the writ petition, stated to have been committed in the selections in which the petitioner had appeared before the Respondents. A perusal of the said allegations indicate that they are absolutely vague and unsupported by any proper pleading; or any evidence to substantiate the said allegations. The Apex Court in the case of Bharat Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. AIR1988 SC 2181 , JT1988 (4)SC 91 , 1988 (2)SCALE890 , (1988)4 SCC534 , [1988 ]Supp2 SCR1050 , has cautioned the Courgas under- As has been already noticed, although the point as to profiteering by the State was pleaded in the writ petitions before the High Court as an abstract point of law, there was no reference to any material in support thereof nor was the point argued at the hearing of the writ petitions. Before us also, no particulars and no facts have been given in the special leave petitions or in the writ petitions or in any affidavit, but the point has been sought to be substantiated at the time of hearing by referring to certain facts stated in the said application by HSIDC. In our opinion, when a point which is ostensibly a point of law is required to be substantiated by facts, the party raising the point, if he is the writ petitioner, must plead and prove such facts by evidence which must appear from the writ petition and if he is the respondent, from the counter-affidavit. If the facts are not pleaded or the evidence in support of such facts is not annexed to the writ petition or to the counter-affidavit, as the case may be, the court will not entertain the point. In this context, it will not be out of place to point out that in this regard there is a distinction between a pleading under the Code of Civil Procedure and a writ petition or a counter-affidavit. While in a pleading, that is, a plaint or a written statement, the facts and not evidence are required to be pleaded, in a writ petition or in the counter-affidavit not only the facts but also the evidence in proof of such facts have to be pleaded and annexed to it. So, tin; point that has been raised before us by the appellants is not entertainable, Bui, in spite of that, we have entertained it to show that it is devoid of any merit.
(3.) Keeping in view the ratio of the aforesaid decision, the present writ petition also lacks appropriate pleading; and evidence in support thereof and, as such, the issue raised by the petitioner cannot be entertained. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.;