IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.522 of 2008 (PIL) Indian National Trust for Art & Cultural Heritage …Petitioner Versus Union of India & others … Respondents Dated: 12.11.2009 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, ACJ. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Shri Vipul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri P.C. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos. 2 to 6 and 9 & 10, Shri U.K. Uniyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Shobhit Sahariya, Advocate for respondent no.7 and Shri Mohit Molakhi, Advocate holding brief of Shri D.S. Patni, Advocate for respondent no.8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This PIL has been filed raising various issues with regard to the problems that is being faced by the city of Nainital and its citizens. Having heard Shri Vipul Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner, we find that the issues raised in this writ 2 petition are already engaging the attention of the Court in other WPPIL matters. Consequently, the Court finds it appropriate that this petition is disposed of so that there may not be multiplicity of proceeding for the same relief in this Court. Relief Nos.1 & 2 which has been claimed by the petitioner is already engaging the attention of the Court in WPPIL No.766 of 2008 and 49 of 2009. With regard to relief no.3, we find that such a relief with regard to construction of a road from Tallital to Mallital is not physically possible. The Court finds that Tallital and Mallital are connected by the Mall Road, by the ‘Thandi Sadak’, by a road going through the Governor’s House and another road going from “Barah Patthar” to Ramsey Hospital and coming down to Tallital. At the present moment there are these four alternate routes which the citizens of Nainital can take to reach one end of Nainital to the other end of Nainital. A construction of a new road will not be proper. Consequently, relief no.3 cannot be granted at this stage. So far as relief no.4 and 4(A) is concerned, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to file a separate petition, if so advised after enclosing all necessary material and before approaching the writ court it would be appropriate if the petitioner approaches the authority for the relief being claimed by him. If such a representation is made, the 3 authority will consider and pass appropriate order expeditiously. This Public Interest Litigation is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observations. (V.K.Bist, J.) (Tarun Agarwala, ACJ.) 12.11.2009 Arti