High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPPIL/83/2016dismissed

Dilip Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-10-23Hon'Ble The Chief Justice,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPPIL No. 83 of 2016 • Dilip Patel S/o Karshan Bhai Patel Aged About 62 Years R/o Plot No 18, Patrakar Colony, Colony No.2, Infront Of Indira Awas Behind S.B.I. Colony, Fafadih, Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur (CG) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Sanskritik Awam Dharmik Nyas, Mahandi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG)

2. Secretary, Urban Development, Mahandi Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (CG)

3. Collector, Raipur, District Raipur (CG)

4. Superintendent Of Police, Raipur, District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. Municipal Corporation, Through The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District: Raipur (CG)

6. Raipur Development Authority Through The Chief Executive Officer, Raipur, Development Authority, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

7. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Raipur Tahsil & Distirct Raipur (CG)

8. Station House Officer, Police Station Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (CG)

9. Additional Collector Cum President, District Level Committee For Taking Decision Over The Religious Places Raipur, Tahsil & Distirct Raipur (CG)

10. President, Indira Awas Nagar Vikas Awam Jan Kalyan Samiti, Infront Of Jain Kirana Store, Indira Awas, Rani Laxmi Bai Ward No.23, Fafadih, Raipur Tahsil & Distirct Raipur (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri R. Pradhan, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Addl. Adv. General.

For Respondent No.6 :

Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Smt. Meera Jaiswal, Advocate For Respondent No.10 :

Shri V.P. Shukla, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, CJ Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu,J Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, CJ 23/10/2018

1. An enquiry had been held with regard to the location of temple in part of a garden of a residential colony. It is affecting nobody's interest except that of the petitioner.

2. The report of the Committee categorically states that no other person in the locality has any objection nor it is obstructing any thoroughfare or traffic in that area. The personal agenda of petitioner cannot be carried on through a public interest litigation of this Court. He has freedom to go and file a civil suit, if he so wants, by moving a civil Court of competent jurisdiction.

3. In view of above, this PIL is dismissed.

Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge roshan/-