APARESH KUMAR SINGH,J. - (1.) The instant Public Interest Litigation has progressed to a considerable extent as would appear from the affidavits filed by the parties and also the orders passed from time to time thereupon.
(2.) One of the issue which has been raised on behalf of the Respondent State Authorities right from the outset do not seem to have seriously brought to the notice of the Court earlier or replied affirmatively by the PIL petitioner himself in any of the affidavits. This PIL with the prayer made herein concerning the implementation of the Bihar Deed Writers Licensing Rules, 1996, more specifically related to issuance of license to the deed writers in the Sub Registry Office of Rajmahal in the District of Sahibganj was raised by the PIL petitioner through the instant writ petition with categorical averments at para 2 thereof that he is a social worker. That the instant writ petition has been filed in a representative capacity in the larger public interest and there is no direct or indirect personal interest of the petitioner.
(3.) Respondent no.2, 4 and 5 in their first counter affidavit dated 18.7.2016 questioned the conduct of the writ petitioner in the light of the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in the case of State of Uttaranchal v. Ballwant Singh Chaufal and others, reported in (2010) 3 SCC 402 and The Jharkhand High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010. It was asserted therein that the writ petitioner's interest is involved as he is doing the work of deed writer. At para 19 they have further stated that writ petitioner has not made a clean declaration in para 2 of the writ petition and failed to disclose his interest in Sub-registry Office, Rajmahal. The writ petitioner is an advocate of Rajmahal and he is doing the work of deed writer. The certificate of the Bar Association, Sahibganj dated 16.7.2016 and a copy of the registered deed prepared by the petitioner were also enclosed as Annexure-J and K respectively. Petitioner however failed to respond to that even in his subsequent affidavit. It is further submitted on behalf of learned counsel for the Respondent State by referring to the Annexure-2 and 3 of the writ petition that in fact the brother of the petitioner Ashok Kumar Mandal S/o Uma Charan Mandal is himself a licensee deed writer under the Sub-registry Office, Rajmahal within Sahibganj. Annexure-3 also under the signature of District Sub Registrar, Sahibganj at Rajamahal shows the name of the brother of petitioner at serial no. 10 as a licensee deed writer. These relevant facts related to the credentials of the petitioner and absence of direct or indirect interest in the cause were conspicuously suppressed on the part of the petitioner. The Jharkhand High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 also required the petitioner to give his full and complete details so as to reveal his/her interest, credentials, qualifications relevant for the Public Interest Litigation along with declaration that he/she has no personal interest, direct or indirect, in the subject matter of PIL.;