High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2661/2017disposed off

Abhijeet Pandey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-06-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 2661 of 2017 • Abhijeet Pandey S/o. Shri R. K. Pandey, Aged About 25 Years R/o A-2 Kanchan Vihar, In Front Of Khamtarai Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, P. S. Rakhi, Tahsil Aarang, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Department, Sihawa Bhawan, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Engineer, Mini Mata Hasdao Bango Project, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

5. R. K. Patel, Assistant Grade-II, Office Of The Chief Engineer, Mini Mata Hasdao Bango Project, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner Mr. C.J.K. Rao, Advocate For State Mr. S.P. Kale, Dy. Advocate General SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice P.Sam Koshy Order On Board 23.06.2017

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking direction to the Respondents No. 1 to 4 to take appropriate action against Respondent No.5 who is working as Assistant Grade II under the Respondent No.3.

2. This Court is not inclined to entertain the petition for a simple reason that the Petitioner in the opinion of this Court has no locus to file the present Petition as the Petitioner is neither directly nor indirectly

connected with the issue involved in the case.

3. It is well settled that the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is to be invoked at the instance of the persons who is aggrieved by the action of the respondents and where the fundamental rights of the Petitioner is denied or deprived by the action of the Respondents. The Petitioner has not been able to show either of any such ground in this Writ Petition. Thus, the Writ Petition is not tenable and the same is accordingly rejected.

4. It is made clear that our reluctance to entertain this Petition would not preclude the Petitioner in approaching higher authorities in the department in respect of the issue raised by the Petitioner in the present Writ Petition.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE kishore