HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM : HON'BLEMR.S.R.NAYAK.C.J.AND HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI.J. d: WRIT PETITION N0.1234 OF 2001 J.; Petitioner versys Respondents Shri Sheetal Singh Thakur Ex.Soeiety Manager, S/o Sher Singh Thakur, Aged About 51 yeare, Rto Village- Putpura, Teh-Navagarh, District-Durg (Chhatjsgarh) 1. Asstt. Registrar, Go-operative Societies,Bilaspur(C.G.) 2. Joint Registrar, Go-operative Societies, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bitgispur (C.G.) 4. Zila Sahakar Kendriya BankMaryadit, Bilaspur (C.G.) 5. Generai Man^er, Zila Sahakari kendriya BankMaryadit,Bilaspur(CG) 6. Shri Baijnath Chandrakar President, Zila Sahakari Kendriya Barik Maryadit, Bilaspur(CG) 7. Shri Murlidhar Sharma, Director, Unnat Pashu(»lan Samshta Oppt.t-uthra Hospital, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspdr(C.G4 Present : Mr.R.P.Sahu.counsetforthepetitioner. | Mr. Utkarsh Verma, Deputy Govemment Advqcate for respondentsNo.1to3. ; Mr.Rajesh Pandey,counsielforresponclentsNo.4ahd 5. Mr. Manindra Shrivas!:ava,SeniorAdv6catewithMr.Ashish Shrivastava,coynselforrespondentNo.6. ; NoneappearsforrespQndehtNo.7. ^, - 2 S.R.Nayak.C.J.: ORAI.ORDER (Passedon12tl'ofSeptember,2006) The followingorder ofthe Courtwas passed by This is anothercase in the series which brings to the fore how a noble, laudable and public justice-oriented l^atprocess, that is what we call "Public InteresJ: Litigation"which is essentially and initially meahtto provide legal representetiontopreviouslyunrepresentedgroups and citizens, ean be misused and abused by unscrupulous persons, without any element of public interest either in their heart or in mind, to have their own axe to grind against an indhndual for an oblique consideration and as a vexatious measure. 1 . '• 2. Wehavecarefullygonethroughthewntpetitionavermente and the affidavits. The petitioner has nowhere disclosed the activist role played by him in the past. On the other hand, the pleadings filed bythe respondents would show that the petitioner is an employee of the Bank - respondent N0.4, and when he was about to be prosecuted for misappropriation of the funds of the Bank - respondent No.4, realizing that he had no defence, sought voluntary retirement, and immediately thereafter, he has come foward to institute this^Publie Interest Litigation as a vexatious measure to harass office bearers and ffie officersof the Bank - respondent No.4. The petjtion lacks bona fide. 3. tn para 4 of thewrit petition, itisstatedthaton several complaints and representations made by the R^istrar of Co-bperative Societies, Chhattisgarh State direpted the basisof petitioner, the "conduct ...€- ll: ii;a iSBi of an enquiry into the affairs of the Bank - respondent No.4. His only complaint isthat the enquiry was notcompleted as he expected. So alleging, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the Registrar, Co- operativeSocietiesto eomplete the enquirywithin a stipulated time as fixed bythis Court and tosubmit enquiry report before this Geurt. 4. Inthe retum filed bytheBank-respondent No.4,itisstated ttiat theenquirywas already completed and report was also submitted on 25-7-2001. In that view of the matter, this writ petition has beeome infructuous. 5. In the result, wedismiss thewrit petition with exemplary coste, quantified at Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) payable by the petiUoner to Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of one month from today. The Registry is directed to report to the Court after one month whether thjs direetibn has been complied with by the petitioner or not. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Satish K. Agniliotri Judge SOpali :iilj