JUDGMENT By the Court.—The petitioner is a political person. He had been a member of the Legislative Assembly U.P. and a Minister in the U.P. Government. Some time in the year 1996, he was provided with Z category security at the Government expense. The said security continued with him till the issuance of impugned order/radiogram dated 20.9.2001 by which the said security was ordered to be withdrawn leaving behind only one gunner in his security. The aforesaid order/radiogram has been challenged by the petitioner in the instant writ petition. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Dhruv Mathur has submitted that the petitioner is not only entitled to Z category security but in fact, Z plus category security at the Government expense in view of the threat perceptive he is facing from none other than the Ruling Party itself. Therefore, the impugned order/radiogram withdrawing the petitioner’s security except one gunner is wholly illegal, arbitrary and unwarranted. 3. On the other hand, Sri Ashwini Kumar Singh Government Advocate has submitted that at present, the petitioner is neither a Minister nor a sitting MLA. Some of the family members of the petitioner have armed licences and they do possess fire arms. The petitioner is a history sheeter against whom several criminal cases are pending. Presently there is no danger to the petitioner’s life as is evident from the report of the District Level Committee (DLC) dated 8.3.2007. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the security which was granted to him earlier and the said security has rightly been withdrawn by the impugned order/radiogram. 4. The matter with regard to grant of security to private persons has been considered in detail by the Division Bench at Allahabad in the case of Gayur Hasan v. State of U.P. and others, 2006(9) ADJ 546 (All), wherein, after considering the various Government orders, it has been provided that the security cannot be provided to private persons on flimsy grounds or for exercising influence upon public at large. The Division Bench at Allahabad is said to be monitoring the above matter and has, by an order dated 13.3.2007, directed the State Government to get the situation reviewed by the High Power Committee (HPC) consisting of Secretary (Home), Additional Director General (Law and Order), and Additional Director General (Security) with an impartial mind on the basis of the reports of the District Level Committee consisting of District Magistrate, Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police and the Incharge of the Local Intelligence Unit (ILU). In pursuance of the said order of the High Court, it appears that out of 368 cases only 29 cases were found to be fit for providing security by the HPC. Even the said order providing gunners to these 29 persons as approved by the HPC, was stayed until the same was reconsidered by the new HPC to be constituted with the approval of the Election Commission in view of the ensuing Assembly Election in the State of U.P. 5. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and on the perusal of the record, we find that the petitioner was provided with the Z category of security way back in the year 1996 due to the threat perceptive existing at that time and subsequently, when he was an MLA/Minister in the U.P. Government. Admittedly, the petitioner has ceased to be a Minister. He is neither elected Member of Legislative Assembly or Member of Parliament. There is nothing on record to suggest that the threat perceptive on the basis of which Z category was provided to the petitioner, continues even today. There is no instance of actual attack on the petitioner or his family members in the past few years. The grant of security at the cost of tax payers without periodically review of the situation, for an unlimited period is not permissible. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the security granted to the petitioner in the year 1996 at the Government expense cannot be continued indefinitely without the situation being reviewed from time to time. Apart from the above, we have also been informed at the bar that the polling in the Shikohabad Assembly segment for the Assembly Election 2007 had already taken place. Apart from the above, we have also been informed at the bar that the polling in the Shikohabad Assembly segment for the Assembly Election 2007 had already taken place. Therefore, in view of the totality of the facts and circumstances, the petitioner who is neither a minister nor-a sitting MLA cannot be permitted to enjoy the benefit of Z category security which was granted to him in the year 1996 for an indefinite period. The existence of the threat perceptive to the petitioner or any danger to his life as on date cannot be evaluated or determined by the High Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. 6. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move a representation for the continuation of his aforesaid security to the Secretary Home within a week from today. The Secretary Home shall consider and place the said representation of the petitioner before the High Power Committee who shall consider the same in accordance with law keeping in mind the directions of Allahabad High Court issued from time to time in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 5520 of 2006, Gayur Hasan v. State of U.P. and others, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of presentation of the representation alongwith a certified copy of this order and till the said representation is decided, the petitioner shall continue to avail the facility of two gunners for his security. 7. In view of the above, we do not consider it proper to allow the interim order dated 5.4.2002 to be continued any longer by virtue of which the petitioner is enjoying the Z category security. The interim order is hereby vacated. With the above observation, the writ petition is finally disposed of. No orders as to costs. ————