Kunal Shukla v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPPIL No. 137 of 2017 Kunal Shukla S/o Shri Ashok Shukla, Aged About 42 Years R/o C-20 Shailendra Nagar Raipur 492001 Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary Town And Country Planning Development Department, Secretariate Mahandi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Chief Secretary, Public Works Department Secretariate Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Executive Engineer, Public Work Department Bridge Construction Division Raipur 492001 Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Municipal Corporation Raipur, Through Chief Executive Officer Municipal Corporation Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001

5. The Collector, District Raipur, Collectorate Office Raipur, Thasil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001

6. Project Director, National High Ways Authority Of India House No. 5196 Behind B.T.I. College, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 Phone 07712442358

7. Sudt. Of Police Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001

8. Station House In Charge, Police Station Golbazar Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri V.G. Tamaskar, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General. For Respondent No.4 : Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondent No.6 : Ms. Saumya Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 27/08/2018 Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 1.

Heard counsel for the parties.

2.

The allegation made in this Public Interest Litigation is that certain sky walk/sky bridge constructed on G.E. Road from Shastri Chowk Square and

towards Jail Road, Raipur is not in public interest. Besides, it is also alleged that large scale corruption has taken place in construction of sky walk, for which expenses of Rs.5 Crores has been made.

3.

Since this Court is neither an expert in urban planning and development and therefore, the infrastructure which is required to be provided to the people by roads, fly-overs, sewerage, drainage or other upliftment to make a city smart city or future ready should be best left to the experts. They have the vision on the inputs keeping the future requirement of a growing city. Even though it feels nice to hear from the members of the Bar that the Court is expert of experts, but we do not subscribe such theory.

4.

So far as element of corruption which is alleged, for which an inquiry by Central Bureau of Investigation etc. is demanded by the Petitioner since he claims that he has obtained certain inputs under the Right to Information Act to establish so, there are enough agencies within the State which can look into such allegation and take remedial measure, if so required. We do not have to specify the forums. 5.

The writ application therefore is dismissed. However, dismissal of the petition may not come in the way of the Petitioner for setting the law in motion where he would like to, so far as the element of corruption is concerned if it is made out and not only made.

Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Anu