^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. PETITIONERS Writ Petition (PILl No.3673 of 2009. 1. Manilal Chandrakar, Aged about 54 years, S/o Daulat Chandrakar 2. Chaman Lal Dhruv, Aged about 36 years, S/o Chhaman Lal Dhruv 3. Arun Ku Chandrakar, Aged •about 50 years, S/o Chhabiram Chandrakar 4. Narendra Baghel, Aged about 36 years, S/o Arjun Ram Baghel 5. Reikhlal Chandrakar, Aged about 44 years, S/o Chhabi Ram 6. Ashok Chandrakar, Aged about 44 years, S/o Ram Sharan 7. Somnath Chandrakar, Aged about 35 years, S/o Chhotelal Chandrakar. All are R/o Khamahariya, Tah. and Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.). 8. Karthik Ram, Aged about 71 years, S/o Nandu, R/o Amarbais, Tah. & Distt.Mahasamund. All the petitioners are agrieulturist by occupation. VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State-of Chhattisgarh, Through its Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2 Chhattisgarh State Agrr? Marketing Board, Raipur. 3 Government of India, Through - The Secretary Department of Agrieulture, New Delhi. l/'i BSiBilfflI s^ ^\ Writ Petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India. Present: Shri G.S. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri D.R. Minz, learned counsel forthe petitioners. Shri V.V.S.Murthy, learned Deputy A.G. with Shri Akhil Agrawal, learned Panei Lawyer for the State/ respondent No.1. ORDER (22nd July, 2009) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Learned counsel for the parties are heard. 2) The petitioners, who are agriculturists by occupation have filed this writ petition styled as 'Public Interest Litigation' for the following reliefs: "10.1 That a writ of mandamus be issued to the Respondents directing them to ensure that the agricultural communities get thesupport price oftheir produce. 10.2 Any other writ as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper be also issued in favour of the petitioners." 3) From the text and tenor of the writ petition, it is apparent that the petitioners have personal interest in the writ petition and the reliefs sought by them. That apart, the petitioners have not pleaded in the writ petition as to how -the other agriculturists of the State are not in a position to approach the High Court for the reliefs in their individual capacity. f 4) In this view of the matter, we decline to entertain the wrtt petition filed by the petitioners as 'Public Interest Litigation', with the -^l ^ffl'hi'li-te'" •^^.. ss liberty to the petitioners to file writ petition in their individual capacity for the redressal of their grievances projected in the writ petition. 5) With the above liberty, the writ petition is dismissed. 6) The security amount of Rs.5,000/- deposited by Shri D.R.Minz, Advocate on behalf of the petitioners, be refunded to the petitioners. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu m -l^l'';.'!*-*-^^ ii iLj j