← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPPIL/83/2017dismissed

Sandeep Patle v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-10-05Hon'Ble The Chief Justice,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (PIL) No. 83 of 2017 Sandeep Patle S/o Shri Sadashiv Patle Aged About 26 Years R/o C/o Shri Tilakram Dewangan, Near Maharastrian Teli Samaj Bhavan, Ashwini Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Vanshi Farms Private Limited Old Name Pochi Farms Office- Ring Road No. 2, Near Telephone Exchange New Industrial Area, Gogaon, Raipur, District Raipur, Pin 493221 Chhattisgarh.

3. Prakash Industries Limited, Office- Ring Road No. 2, Near Telephone Exchange New Industrial Area, Gogaon, Raipur, District Raipur, Pin 493221 Chhattisgarh.

4. District Collector, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

5. Sub-Divisional Officer Revenue, Saja, Tehsil Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

6. Tehsildar, Saja, Tehsil Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

7. Revenue Inspector, Deokar, Tehsil- Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

8. Forest Range Officer, Forest Circle Saja, Tehsil- Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Ashish Beck, Advocate.

For State/ Respondent : Shri A.S.Kachhwaha, Additional Advocate General No. 1, 4 to 8 For Respondent No. 2 : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 05/10/2018 1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

We are not satisfied that there is an issue which is required to be entertained and dealt with under the heading of a Public Interest Litigation, especially when the bonafides of the Petitioner is not yet established and the reason for him to initiate the present writ application. Admittedly, the

forest or the trees were grown on a private land with due permission and its removal is also permissible under the law by the competent authority. 3.

In view of the above, this writ application is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Amit