, '^ m f "?'?lf»y IN THE HON'BLE HIGHJ^OURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.l W. P. (CR.l N0. ^bl^i OF 2010 PETITIONER ^ (?\^v; /o,. •^v, ..-"'9.y\^-' ^^^" ^ ^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^ ^ / Jidhan Singh Rathiya S/o Late Shri Udraj Singh Rathiya, aged about 47 years, R/o Village-Tundri, Police Station-Dabhra, Tahsil-Dabhra, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through-Th,e Secretary Department of Home Minisfa-y Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.). The Superintendent of Police, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Police Station Dabhra, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) The Collector Janjgir, District Janjgir-Cheunpa (C.G.) The Sub Divisional Officer f^^tt © (Revenue) Dabhra, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) /6. Food Officer, Food Department, Janjgir Champa District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). /7. Kanhaiya Lal Sahu S/o Shriram Sahu, aged about 45 years, R/o Village- Tundri, Police Station- a Dabhra, Tahsil-Dabhra, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 7; :^, WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ~';.:0> ^ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner raost hunibly and respectfully begs to submit as under:- (1) PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER: - As shown above in the Cause Title. (2) PARTICULAR OF THE RESPONDENTS: - As shown above in the Cause Title. (3) PARTICULAR OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICHTHE PETITION IS BEING MADE :- A< ^ -/•".l ^ ^^ ^S3 v€/x^- HIGH COURTORCHHArriSGARM AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Cr.»N0. CT44 OF 2010 Petitioner Jidhan Singh Rathiya Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTtTUTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri.Panel LawyerfortheState. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on 20th day of November, 2010) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ In the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to lcxlge FIR and investigate the matter against the respondent No.7. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a resident of village Tundri and being a r^ident of the vitlage, the petitioner made a complaint to the respondent No.5 for irregularities against the respondent No.7, who being a Sarpanch of Village Panchayat- Tundri, was also runnjng a falr price shop. 3. The enquiry was conducted by the Assistant Food Officer and the report of the enquiry was sent to the respondent No.5 & 6. On the basis of enquiry report, a show cause notice was issued on 4.5.2010 and the revenue case No.32B/121/09-10(Jidhan Singh v. Kanhaiya Lal Sahu) was registered and thereafter, the fair price shop of the respondent No.7 was suspencted on 14.7.2010. After suspension of fair price shop, no actlon has been taken against the respondent No.7 by filing FIR against him. Thus, this S!».9S.«3fe). ^s&w petition seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to lodge FIR against the respondent No.7. 4. On the comptaint of the petilioner, enquiry was conducted and on finding that there were irregularities in the operation of fair price shop, allotted to the respondent No.7, was suspended, as stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, wants todging of FIR against the respondent No.7. 5. The relief sought by the petitioner was very extraordinary when the authorities had taken cognizance of the complaint lodged by the petitioner seriously. Thereafter, they proceeded to take action and consequentty fair price shop was suspended. There is no reason asto why this petition to direct to lodge FIR at the instance of complainant, be entertained. The grievance of the pettttoner seems to be personal, as after flling comptaint before the authorities, the petitloner has no role thereafter. 6. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition is frivolous and without merit. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. ——— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ishok 1