JUDGMENT Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J. The relief which has been claimed in this petition, which has ostensibly been filed in the public interest is to direct respondents 1 to 4 to inquire into the matter on the application filed by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has not made the mandatory disclosure as required under the provisions of sub-Rule 3-A of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, which were amended following the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal & Ors., reported in 2010 AIR SCW 1029. 3. Sub-rule 3-A reads as follows: - “(3A) In addition to satisfying the requirements of the other rules in this Chapter, the petitioner seeking to file a Public Interest Litigation, should precisely and specifically state, in the affidavit to be sworn by him giving his credentials, the public cause he is seeking to espouse; that he has no personal or private interest in the matter; that there is no authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court or High Court on the question raised; and that the result of the Litigation will not lead to any undue gain to himself or anyone associated with him, or any undue loss to any person, body of persons or the State.” 4. No disclosure has been made in the writ petition in regard to the facts, credentials or bona fides of the petitioner. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this petition on this ground only. We, however, make it clear that we are not expressing any view on the merits of the proceedings. 5. The writ petition is dismissed.