Judgment : Petitioner claims to be the General Secretary of I.N.T.U.C. Young Workers Council. According to him, he is taking up social activities and highlighted various irregularities. It is also stated that he is the President of Visakha Municipal Corporation Employees & Workers Union, Rajiv Time Scale Employees Union of Andhra University and Priyadarshini NMR Employees Union, Andhra University. He contends that Andhra University is without Vice-Chancellors from August, 2007 onwards, and the In-charge Vice Chancellor and in particular, the 5th respondent herein, have been taking major decisions contrary to the provisions of law. He made specific allegations against the 5th respondent. According to him, attempts were made by respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 to fill the vacancies without any notification and the notice displayed on 17.01.2013, are contrary to law. He alleged that the 5th respondent has taken all his retirement benefits, but is delaying the same to others. One serious allegation against the 5th respondent is that he is trying to reinstate a corrupt Professor, by name Vivekananda Murthy, with the help of the Standing Counsel of the University, by name Dr. P.B.Vijay Kumar, though a writ appeal is pending before this Court. He alleged that the 5th respondent has transferred as many as 300 Colleges without permission of the Executive Council and the same has resulted in huge loss to the University. The appointments made in the Women’s Engineering College, Agro Economics Department are also found fault with. Extensive reference is made to non-functioning of the Executive Council. In effect, the petitioner contends that the entire functioning of the University from 2007 onwards is illegal, untenable and he attributed mala fides to various officials. On 04.02.2003, this Court took serious exception to some of the averments in the affidavit and directed appearance of the petitioner as to whether he stands by those allegations. On 06.02.2013, he filed another affidavit, in which more serious allegations are made. Today, the petitioner appeared and states that he stands by the allegations made by him. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. An unfortunate situation prevails in the State, if not in the Country. Every one feels free not only to express views, but also impose them on other organisations including the Government whether or not they have got anything to do with them or have verified the facts from correct sources. An unfortunate situation prevails in the State, if not in the Country. Every one feels free not only to express views, but also impose them on other organisations including the Government whether or not they have got anything to do with them or have verified the facts from correct sources. The petitioner claims to be a Trade Union leader. One expects him to concentrate on the matters pertaining to workers and labourers and in a given case, he may get relief to many individuals. Visakhapatnam is a place, which has the largest work force in large number of public and private sector gigantic organisations. The field of activity for any Trade Union leader would be optimum and in certain cases, not only an individual but also an organisation may not be adequate to deal with a particular class of work force, not to speak of the entire work force, at that place. The post of Vice Chancellor became vacant on completion of the term of the incumbent in November, 2011. Though steps were initiated in the right earnest, one after the other, writ petitions came to be filed and there was some delay in appointment of the Vice Chancellor. Ultimately, a Vice Chancellor has been appointed in the recent past. The petitioner, however, stated that the University is without Vice Chancellor for the past six years. Assuming that his interest is only to ensure that the University functions with a regular and not an in-charge Vice Chancellor, he could have simply impressed upon the Court about the necessity and left the matter at that. However, the nature of allegations made against the acting Vice Chancellor and other officials, and strangely enough, even the Standing Counsel, is indeed outrageous. In his additional affidavit, the petitioner stated that he is only a matriculate. However, he proceeds as though he can command the administration of the entire University, be it in the context of appointment of Professors and other teaching staff or affiliation or transfer of other colleges. Unfortunately, the petitioner is not alone in this regard. Approaching the Court with similar writ petitions or even publishing such items in the newspapers has become the order of the day, and in many cases, it has proved to be very profitable business without any investment. A time has come to discourage such tendencies and ensure that they do not recur and repeat. Approaching the Court with similar writ petitions or even publishing such items in the newspapers has become the order of the day, and in many cases, it has proved to be very profitable business without any investment. A time has come to discourage such tendencies and ensure that they do not recur and repeat. This Court is of the view that the petitioner must be disentitled from taking any steps except as regards genuine activity of Trade Union. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed by directing that: (a) none of the representations made by the petitioner in relation to any matters pertaining to the University shall be entertained by any authority; (b) the District Administration shall ignore any representation made by the petitioner unless it pertains to himself or to genuine activity of Trade Union; (c) the petitioner shall pay costs of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only) to be deposited in the Tribal Welfare Hostel for Girls in the scheduled area within the District, as may be identified by the District Collector, to whom a copy of this order shall be marked, within four weeks from today. On such deposit, the amount shall be utilised for providing amenities to the inmates of the Hostel. If the petitioner fails to deposit the amount and submit receipt before the District Collector, he shall not be entitled to undertake any activity even in the field of Trade Union. The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition shall also stand disposed of.