^ 1 p 3. 4. 5. J. Sharbanand Dubey, S/o Late Shri Ram Ekwar Dubey, Aged about 42 years, Profession-Joumalist, "CHHATTISGARH Kl SATTA" Weekly Raipur, R/o Ambikapur, District Surguja, HATTIS State of Chhattisaarh, Through : The Secretary, Pashupa!an Vibhag, D.K.S. Bhav/an, Raipur, (C.G.) The Director, Veternary Sen/jces, Raipur, (C.G.). , The CoilectoF, Ambskapur, District Surguja, (C.G.). Dr. M.P.S. Parihar, Deputy Director, Veternary Services, Ambikapur, Distrlct Surguja (C.G.) Shrl Sharad Chand Khare, Assistant Grade-3, Office of the Deputy Dirsctor, . Veternary Services, Ambikapur, Di'strict Surguja, (C.G.) :R ARTiCLE 22S/227 OF THE Present: Shrl Rakesh Dubey, counsel for the petitioner. -Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Government Advocate for the Stats /respondents No.1 to 3. •th The following order of the Court was passed .earned counsel for the parties are heard. t.^s-Sf^^ v€S'""\ s- '') '^•'.'~-."-J~'':^- s i,. "':t" 'y s s... ~^</ ""^s^" 2) Petitioner Sharbanand Dubey claiming himself to be a journalist has filed this writ petition sty!ed as 'Public Interest Litigation' for the fo'lowina reSiefs: "I.The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pieased to issus an • appropriate wriVorder/direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondent No.1 to make enquiry into the compiaints made against the Respondent No. 4 & 5, in the interest ofjustice. 2. The Hon'ble Court may kindiy be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 & 2 to take Sega! action under the provision of the M.P. Ciyil Services (Classification, Conirol and Appea!) Rules, 1966 against the Respondent No. 4 & 5 and So launch the criminal prosecutjon against them. 3. The Hon'ble Court may kindiy be pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 &2 to recover the loss sustained bythe State Government by the iliegal action of the Respondent No. 4 & 5. 4. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 to take further action regarding the misconduct found proved against the Respondent No. 4 vide order dated 23.07.2002. 5. Any other .relief which th.is Hon'bie Court deems fit and proper be passed in favour of the petitioner. 6. Cost of the petition." 3) The petitioner thus in substance is seeking an enquiry against respondent 4 Dr MPS Parihar and respondent No.5 Sharad Chand Khare alleging commission of irregularities by them, mis-using their officiai position. 4) For ascertaining the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioner against respondents No.4 & 5, a 'fact finding enquiry' would be necessary. Such 'fact finding enquiry' ean be better conducted by 'Lok Ayog'. 5) In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach 'Lok Ayog' for the redressal of the petitioner's grievances projected in the writ petition. •[ liUli,i ^aS^-''" '"'^V.^^Z^^' 6) -The security amount of Rs.2.000/. ^^^ " nQ-^ww- deposifed bv th Petitionerberefunded^epetifioner.""' uc^'lea Dy the padma Sd/- .au'ef Jusface Sd/- T.P Sharma Judge ^.