Jai Thakur Dev Kisan Kalyan Samiti v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPPIL No. 4 of 2019 Jai Thakur Dev Kisan Kalyan Samiti, Through President - Nandlal Sahu, S/o Guharam Sahu, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Village Tusma, Police Station - Shivrinarayan, Tahsil Nawagarh, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of The Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, Police Station - Kewli, Civil And Revenue District - Raipur Chhattisgarh
2. Collector, Janjgir-Champa, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
3. Superintendent of Police, Janjgir-Champa, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
4. Sub - Divisional Officer, Janjgir-Champa, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
5. Tahsildar, Shivrinarayan, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
6. Nayab Tahsildar, Navagarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Adv.
For State :
Shri Gagan Tiwari, Dy. G.A.
DB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board by Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava 01.02.2019 1.
This Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner society, on the pleadings that this year market for Dhan Mandi in Village Tusama has been closed and the agriculturist of the village area are required to travel to a distance of 16 k.m. to Shivrinarayan, Navagarh, for sale of agricultural produce in Dhan Mandi. He would submit that earlier Dhan Mandi was situated in Village - Tusma and it was closed because of certain dispute. He would further submit that certain persons are having vested interest and the petitioner society, upon inquiry, came to know that certain lease was granted, way back in the year 1981, which, according to the petitioner, are illegal.
2.
It appears that certain complaints have been made. The competent authority/Respondent No.2, shall get the matter duly inquired as early as possible and take necessary decision.
3.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, as to whether, the lease granted in favour of some persons was correct or not.
4.
Accordingly, the WPPIL is disposed off.
Sd/- Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) (Rajani Dubey) Judge Judge yasmin