High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/1119/2021dismissed

Ajay Kumar Shrivastava v. The Givernment Of Chhattisgarh

2021-03-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1119 of 2021 • Ajay Kumar Shrivastava S/o Shri B. P. Shrivastava Aged About 48 Years AddPt. Ravishankar Shukla Nagar Korba Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Government Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Chief Secretary, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. The Secretary, Office Of The Transport Commissioner, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Gove. Government Of Chhattisgarh Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Saurabh Sinha, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Shri P. Acharya, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 17/03/20

1. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "10.1 It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble court may pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court.

10.2 It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble court may pleased to directed to respondents 1, 2 & 3 to constitute the committee for reasonable fare/charges and standard of the ambulance according to government of India standard NAC IAS-125. 10.4 Any other relief or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deems fit, be also awarded to the petitioner."

2. Though the prayer made in the aforesaid terms and the documents sought under the RTI has been attached but what is the nexus in between the documents and the prayer made is not clear. During the course of submission it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the role of RTI has come to an end. Under these circumstances, since the document attached with the petition and the prayer made there is no nexus and the nature of relief which the petitioner is claiming is like pro bono publico, therefore, the petitioner may approach the appropriate forum, if so advised for redressal of his grievance. I am not inclined to entertain this petition as it is vague and uncertain.

3. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

SD/Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu