Ashok Madan Prakashkar v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

*1* 912wp13938o23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.13938 OF 2023 ASHOK MADAN PRAKASHKAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for the Petitioner : Shri Mane Dhananjay A. AGP for Respondents 1 to 4/State : Shri S.K. Tambe ...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

DATE :- 29th November, 2023 Per Court :- 1.

On 06.11.2023, after considering that the Petitioner does not have a locus to seek initiation of action against 26 officers of the Forest Department, under the pretext of making bald allegations of misappropriation of funds, that too after having retired 10 years ago as a Forest Guard, we had observed in the order dated 06.11.2023 as under:- "1.

The Petitioner does not have any locus to take up the cause of seeking serious disciplinary action against almost 26 Officers. He has retired 10 years ago as a forest guard from the Forest Department and claims misappropriation of huge funds sanctioned for the development of the forest. He has also approached the Director General of Police, State of Maharashtra vide a lengthy representation

*2* 912wp13938o23 dated 28.02.2022 (43 pages).

2.

To test the bonafides of the Petitioner, since this Petition can not be entertained as a Writ Petition, we called upon him as to whether this Petition can be converted into a PIL and whether he would deposit Rs.2,50,000/- to show his bonafides under Rule 7A (i) of the Bombay High Court Public Interest Litigation Rules, 2010 .

3.

He seeks time to take instructions. Stand over to 29.11.2023 in the "Urgent Orders Category"."

2.

We are informed by the learned AGP that the Petitioner has also filed another petition for seeking an enquiry against similar officers on the basis of his allegations with regard to another purported Forest Department's scam. 3.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that he is unable to deposit the amount as is observed in the earlier order.

4.

In view of the above and considering that the Petitioner would not have a locus merely because he is filing a series of complaints, post retirement, against various Forest Officers, this Writ Petition is not being entertained and stands disposed off.

kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)