IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Modification Application No. 319 of 2010 IN Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1100 of 2009 Achariya Budhi Ballabha Shastri, Son of Late Sri Pandit Ravi Datt Jyotishi, Resident of Haripur Kala, Raiwala, District Dehradun. … Petitioner-applicant. Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, Secretariat Subhash Road, Dehradun. 2. Principal Secretary, Medical Education, Government of Uttarakhand Secretariat, Subhash Road, Dehradun. 3. Secretary of Education Government of Uttarakhand Subhash Road, Dehradun. 4. District Magistrate, Haridwar/Administrator, Rishikul Brahmcharya Ashram, Haridwar. … Respondents. Mr. H.C.Bisht, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant. Mr.K.P.Upadhyay, Additional C.S.C., learned counsel for the respondents. Date May 11, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this modification application, the petitioner has prayed that the order dated 27-4-2010 passed by this Court be modified to the extent that petitioner be given liberty to file fresh writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation before appropriate Bench. On 27-4-2010, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum. Subsequent to that the petitioner appears to have filed Writ Petition (P.I.L.) No. 35 of 2010 before the Division Bench of this Court. This modification application has been filed by the petitioner in compliance of the order dated 3-5-2010 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the Writ Petition (PIL) No. 35 of 2 2010, Achariya Budhi Ballabh Shastri Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. I have perused the memo of writ petition. In paragraph no.3, it is stated that the petitioner is a social and public- spirited person and he has no personal interest in the matter. The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the nature of P.I.L., but it was not mentioned in the memo of petition that it was Public Interest Litigation. By a perusal of the pleadings of the petition, I am of the view that the writ petition is in the nature of P.I.L. In this view of the matter, the earlier order dated 27-4-2010 passed by this Court is liable to be modified. The modification application is allowed. Accordingly, the operative portion of order dated 27-4-2010 shall now be read as under:- The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate Court, i.e. P.I.L. Bench of this Court, for redressal of his grievance. To the above extent, the earlier order dated 27-4-2010 stands modified. ( B.S.Verma, J.) RCP 3