HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Division Bench Writ Petition No. 3320 of 2W3 ‘Coram : Hon’bie Shri Jagdish Bhalia, Acting CJ &"‘ Hon’ble‘Shri'SatishvK; Agnihotri, .1 (Writ Peu'tion under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of india) Pt ': resen Shri Vivek Ranjan‘Tiwari, counsei for‘the petitioner. None, appears for the respondents; ORAL ORDER (Passed on 5‘“ December; 200?) The following oral order of the Court wee passedxhy Hon‘bleshri Jagdish Bhaila, Acting C.J. \ PETITIONER Chhattisgarh" chamber of~ Commerce and industries, Raigarh District Unit through ther President R'ajendia Kum’ax Agrawai, S/o. Pannalai aged 45' years, resident of Kabir Chowk, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. Union of india‘, through the Secretary, Ministry! of Raiiway's; RaiiBhawan, New Delhi ' 2. Railway Board,‘.,through the Director, Transport/Manning, Rail. Bhawans New Delhi ‘ 3. South Eastern Railway: through its. General. Manager; Garden:- Reach,‘ Kolkaia (Woof Semi) 4. Divisional Railmy Managen South Eastern Railway, ailaspur. Division; Biiaspur'icmattisga‘rh)’: 5. Stata of‘Chhattisgarhmrough the Coiiector, Raigarh Vat and. PD. District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) \ X \ The Raigarh District Unit of Chhattisgarh Chamber of Commerce and lndustnes has approached this Court m the form of Public interest Litigation wrth a prayer that a wnt m the nature of mandamus be Issued Learned counsel appeanng for the petitioner submits that some foundation stone was laid in the year 1999 for providing terminai maintenance facilities at Raigarh, but the said proposai has been withdrawn subsequentiy, hence, this Public interest Litigation. We find that the Chhattisgarh Chamber of Commerce and Industries has not approached this Court, but its Raigarh District Unit has approached this Court through its President. We further find that there is no authorization by the District unit to its President to tile this writ petition, even there is no such averment in this petition, in support. The moot question raised by the petitioner in this petition is whether the facility provided by the State and its instrumentalities can be withdrawn? ln the case in hand, the railway has decided to provide terminai facilities at Raigarh‘ railway shtion and subsequently it has been i changed. According to the petitioner the project is still viable and the same be prowded oniy at Raigarh During the course of arguments it has come before this Court that most of the trains either do not go to I Raigarh or do not terminate at Raigarh and therefore if the authorities concerned have taken a decrsron on the administrative ground to change the proiect to some better place the pornt is whether this Court can show interference in the domain of the executive? We would have appreciated if the petitioner had done some homework bringing on record the further details as to why the proiect shall remain at Raigarh, how many trains could have been diverted or - 3, how many trains terminate at Raigarh and why this project be made available only at Raigarh raiiway station? We are of the opinion that it was incumbent upon the petitioner and its counsel to make earnest effort for bringing on record all the materials available on the basis. of which a case could have been made out for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia. We further find that how the petitioner became interested in this project has also not been explained. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had earlier taken up some important matters of public interest. On the other hand! we find that the petitioner is an organization comprising of businessmen. Therefore, there is a question mark whether this is a public interest litigation or it has been tiled in the interest of certain businessmen who can be benefited by having the project at Raigarh. ln premise, we feel that this litigation has been tiled in the interest of Commerce and industry. The petitioner has failed to explain why only the project at Raigarh can be in public interest. lt has been indicated on behalf of the railways that the interest and need of traveling public has been given due importance and therefore in the national interest the decision has been taken. Lot of consultations were made by the experts and their Committees having representatives of all the walks of life including professionals at various levels, who had studied the matter for a period of two years. Even the represenhtives of Chamber of Commerce and Trade Association ware also nominated as members of the Committees and it was only in the public interest that the policy was revised. Now, according to the new policy a decision has been taken that terminals wouldbe made available at a distance of¢2506 kms. it has aiso been submitted that the facility which was decided to be provided at \ \ \\ m “wows“,sw \\