Judgment :- 1. Petitioner union has approached this court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to release the salary of the employees. 2. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that respondent corporation has not paid the salary to its employees since the year 2007. The right to claim salary is individual right of employee. 3. The Hon'ble Supreme court in Hari Bansh Lal vs. Sahodar Prasad Mahto and Ors, 2010 (9) SCC 655 and in Girjesh Shrivastava and Ors. Vs. State of M.P. and Ors, 2011 (1) SCT 382 has laid down that PIL is not maintainable in service matters, except for a writ of 'Quo warranto'. Again in Gurpal Singh vs. State of Punjab and Ors, 2005 (5) SCC 136 Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered that: "Courts must do justice by promotion of good faith, and prevent law from crafty invasions. Courts must maintain the social balance by interfering where necessary for the sake of justice and refuse to interfere where it is against the social interest and public good. (State of Maharashtra. vs Prabhu 1994 (2) SCC 481 ) and Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation v. GAR Re-Rolling Mills and Anr. AIR 1994 SC 2151 . No litigant has a right to unlimited draught on the Court time and public money in order to get his affairs settled in the manner as he wishes. Easy access to justice should not be misused as a licence to file misconceived and frivolous petitions. ( Dr. B.K. Subbarao v. Mr. K. Parasaran, JT 1996 (7) SC 265.)" 4. The petitioner has no Locus standi to maintain the writ petition. In case common question of Law and facts are involved, it is always open to file a joint writ by the employees with liberty of the court. The registered association being third party cannot maintain writ in service matters. 5. Consequently, writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.