IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12935 of 2009 NAGRIK SAMASYA SAMADHAN SAMITI, through the Chairman Dr. S.N. Upadhyay, son of late Rajnandan Upadhyaya, resident of 01, MIG, Lohiya Nagar, Kankarbagh Patna-800020 …………………petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Principal Secretary cum commissioner Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar. 2. The Bihar State Housing Board through the Chairman cum Managing Director, 06, Sardar Patel Marg, Patna 800015 3. The Chairman cum Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, 06, Sardar Patel Marg, Patna 800015 4. The Secretary, Bihar State Housing Board, 06, Sardar Patel Marg, Patna 800015 5. The Revenue Officer, Bihar State Housing Board, 06, Sardar Patel Marg, Patna 800015 …………………. Respondents ----------- 5 12-11-2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the Bihar State Housing Board and learned counsel for the interveners. Even after going through the rejoinder on behalf of the petitioner to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents no. 2 to 5, we find that the committee which is trying to maintain this public interest litigation under the chairmanship of Dr. S.N. Upadhyay cannot be safely relied upon for the purpose of espousing public interest litigation. Dr. S. N. Upadhyay has admittedly been litigating against the Bihar State Housing Board and one of his writ petitions relating to price of a house allotted to him is still pending. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not think it proper to allow the petitioner to espouse the issue raised by him as public interest litigation. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. 2 The interveners claim to be allottees of various MIG houses by the respondent- Housing Board. Mr. Ram Suresh Roy, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of interveners submits that 129 allottees of MIG houses have joined hand and decided to challenge Board’s policy of charging compound interest in matters other than delayed payment of interest also. Since we have decided not to permit the petitioner to espouse the aforesaid case and dismissed the writ petition, it is clarified that the interveners, if so advised, may pursue their case through another properly drafted writ petition. I.A. no. 7107/2009 is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)