H CUR OF HTTISR T SPU L mViSION BEB§CH CORAM. rifmsEL—E $HRI RAJEEV GUPTA C J & i HON’BLE "IRE SUN“. KJMAR smHA Wm netltlon (PIL) No 5183 of 2008 §etitioners 1 Jav Klshan Sharma Sio Shn Ram Na ab 76 Worer an War be o a! ker / ajara, D§str orth Btar ane C rv A $ oo A agd a yea Occupa Ex Serea a reent Auma Coe Y R Rapra, anke istrict rth Baar, Kanr C) ansu oa S/o Sh Ra ha age abaut 36 a er nd re r m a Vank, o nn ar ar ae ‘h k ( BR Gupta S/o Shn Rdulare Gupta aged about 70 yersr Ocupatio Presrdet $adbhwna Mar’u r<arkul & SOulai Avtr‘v‘lst R/O Mamhaa Wad Ker Drst otw Basra“ nke CG) ‘ r na h ara M l u 8 r Bues nd Pr ' d a, Ro aa Pr r Kank District NH Bastar nker (CG) ort Ka fn /o h f, od e O raco r n i ar a an d aar nk C “ am , a cn n a h, par r ank t Nr' Kar ( HIG OT CHAGkH A BILAR J rayqni Shurma Aged ou‘ 5 vears Soc1ai k d Ex d: Mamr f Munmip ucuuc“ ' Kan,- Ro Ran _ Kanker, ict N as Kkr (G) $aar h S/o hrl Nr ll e; buur 68 rn, trcn L vrcmn nd Psrd nlni .alumra m’mte awker /o§ ara Kr D No: st ke (G : Hlmh Kthn n meshi Kotn d years SwE Work a Psrdent Guratr Saar“ Vu<s Mama! en R/ Ananura Pa Wd Knkr Di tnet hur Bastar Kaner Cu) ’ Medhal Maginr Slo Sn At aE w’anglqm aged abut 6 yeas Occupation sms a esrdent Pujya Sinhi Pderayar r<anker / Mnjh aa Wad er Abhay Baa S Sn Surajmal Bana aged abt 45 yars ccupation Conttr and Pesrdent Jair Sama; Kaker Ro Rajpaa Wrd Kker District Noh Bst Kaer (G) r Versus , State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secreta DKS BLiIding, ', Department Mantralaya, of Revenue, Raipur (CG) The Kankefacs) oliector, Municipg‘l Councii, KanKer, District Kanker f (CG), Through its Chief Mun’icipel Officer Kanker, District Wi‘it Qetition un&er Articie 226 of ihe Cohstitution of India 1 > i EPresent : Shri PC Pant, counsei for fhe petitioners. Shri Kishore Bhaduri} Additionai Advocate Generai for the State f respondents No.1 & 2. . oRoERl (1 7‘“ September, zoos) The following order of the Court was passed by ‘ Rajeev Ghpta! C.J. Learned oounsei for the parties are heard on admission. 2) The petitioners. have fiied this 'writ petition styled as ‘Publie ‘V interest Litigation", for the following reliefs : “1 0.1 That, the‘ respondents may kindly be irected by writ of mandamus produce the entire records, for perusal before this Hon’ble Court. 10.2 That, this Hon’bie Court may kindly be pieased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the “passenger vehicles to stop in the old bus ,rstand of Kanker city for a few minutes tofaoilitate the commuters i passengers or in the alternative the respondents may kindiy be directed to consider and decide the representations of the people of Kanker city, within a stipuiated period, in accordance with law. ' 10.3 Any, other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may aiso kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 3) On a bare perusal of Annexure P1, it becomes apparent thjat petitioner No.1 Jay Kishan Sharma, who has a bookshop at the did bus stand has'personai businessinterest in the matter. m l §ESPONDENTS d @ \ ‘ 4) In this View of the matter, we ecl§ne to entertain the writ petition as ‘Pubiic Interest Litigation’. i 5) Even otherwise, it is not for the dourts to decide whether the i . ”ouses after the estabiishment of the netv ‘Bus $tand’ shouid/shouid not be ailowed a stoppage at the old ‘BLis Stand‘. ’ 6) The writ petition, therefore, is iiaible to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Set/- Sunil Kumar Sinha i ” Judge Sd/— i Chief Justice ‘