HEGH CQURT OF CHHA?TISGK£tRH AT BitASPtJR DIWSEON BENCH QGRAM: HON’ELE $HRI RAJEEV G§JPTA, €3nJ. & HGN’BLE SHRI SUNQL KUMIXR SINHA, J. WrEE Pemian (PILJ Na. 6427 $f 20% T’HE $0NSEEWATOR QF FORE$T, Department of Forest, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) EEK? PETEWON UNDER ARTICLE ?26 OF THE $ONST3T£§TEGN OF iNDtrit Present : Shri Pankaj Shrivastava; learned counsel fer the petitioner. Shri N.K. Agrawai, teamed Deputy Advocate Generai, for the State. QRBER tr“ January. gooey ’ ?E’§“i“§‘EQNER$: 4‘. DuLGQ RAM, S/o Shré Buddhu Ram, Aged about 45 years, Rm. Chhindbahra, Block—Darbha, Tah. 8: District — Ba$tar (C.G.) 2. JANtgRAM, S/Q. Shr£ Banda, Aged about 45 years‘ Rfo‘ Kumharpati, Advai, Tah. 8: District « Bastar (C.G.) 3‘ ELEDH RMR, 8/0. 8m Hidma, Aged abaut 45 years, R/o. Viilage —- Kumhasaray, Tah. & District -— Bastar (C.G.) Verws RESPQNDEN‘m ’x. $TIHE m: CHHATTRSGARH, Through — Secretary, Degar‘tment of Genera! Adménis‘tration; D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (06.) 2r THE SECRETARY, Department of Forest, DKS. Bhawan, Mantra§aya, Raipur (CG) 3. TEE CfQLiECTDR, Jagdamur, Disirici — Ba$iar (CG. The foilowing order of the Court wa$ passed by Rageew Gwpm, Cw}. Learned ceunsel for the games are heard 0n admisskan. 2. Shri NK‘ Agrawai, ieamed Deputy Advocate Genera! for the respondent$ has raised a pre§§minary objection about the maintainability of the'writ petition as ‘Pubiic interest Liiigation’ on the ground that the petitioners have persona! interest in the matter. 3. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, teamed counsei for the petitioners white conceding that the petitioners have personai interest in the matter, submitted that the petitioners in the writ petition are seeking reiieis for other simiiariy situated persons also. 4. A bare peruse! of the writ petition wouid reveal that the petitioners have not speit out any reason as to why those persons for whom the petitioners are seeking reliefs in this writ petition cannot approach the Court in their individual capacity for redressai of their grievances. 5. in this View of the matter, we deoiine to entertain the writ petition tiied by the petitioners as ‘Pubiio Interest Litigation'. 6. The writ petition, therefore, is iiabie to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed with the iiberty to the petitioners to tile another writ petition in their individual capacity for redressal of their grievances protected in the writ petition " _ a, Sdl? ‘ ESunil Kuniar smha, Judge / Sd/— ’ ; 7‘7 Chief Justice his“ $‘“/ _\\ =‘i