Tubhan Pal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 5103 of 2021

1. Tubhan Pal S/o Nammu Lal Pal Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Ghorbhatti, Gram Panchayat Ugetara, Block Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat Avam Gramin, Vikash Vibhag, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Sub Divisional Officer Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

5. Kishor Kumar Vani Sahayak Aantrik Lekha Prikshan Avam Kararopan Adhikari, Janpad Panchayat Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

6. Mohd. Istiyak Siddique Samanvayak, Sikayat Nivaran, Mahatma Gandhi, Narega, District Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

7. Satish Kumar Dhruw S/o Late Surej Dhruw Aged About 37 Years Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Ugetara, Block Abhanpur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

8. Teman Lal Diwan Secretary, Gram Panchayat Ugetara, Janpad Panchayat Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

9. Sobharam Sonwani S/o Lakhnu Ram Sonwani (Meth), R/o Gram Panchayat Ugetara, Block Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Pushpendra Patel, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Aditya Tiwari, P.L. & Mr. Hariom Rai, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 13.12.2021

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking for following relief:-

"10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/ or writs/ order/ or orders/ to direct the respondents authorities, to take the appropriate action against the respondents No. 7 to 9, in view of enquiry report, submitted by the respondents No. 5 to 6, in the ends of justice."

2. At the outset, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition for an appropriate relief as claimed for is not made out, for the reason that it does not appear to be a case where any of the fundamental rights of the petitioner to have been infringed, which has led to filing of the present writ petition. The writ petition seems to be on an alleged inaction on the part of the respondents in not taking appropriate administrative decision on the complaint which the petitioner has filed to the respondents/State authorities against the private respondents.

3. This Court is of the opinion that the present writ petition is not the proper course available to the petitioner for ventilating his grievance. Reserving the right of the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies available to him, the present writ petition accordingly stands disposed of as not maintainable.

Sd/-- P. Sam Koshy Judge