1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL WRIT No. 567 of 2008 LOKESH KUMAR MANDOT V/S STATE & ORS. Mr. JP JOSHI, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. RAJESH JOSHI, Mrs. PRATISHTHA DAVE, DY.G.A., for the respondent Date of Order : 29.4.2009 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI GOVIND MATHUR,J. ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties. We have also perused the material on record. There had earlier been D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4803/2005, another public interest litigation (writ), wherein the title of the land in question was upheld in favour of the present private respondent M/s. Vision Hotel and Resorts Ltd., by this court vide judgment dated 23rd August 2005, wherein grievance was raised against private respondent, who was constructing the hotel on the said land, and it was also noticed that huge amount has been spent, say more than 4 crores have been spent on construction, apart from the huge amounts deposited by the respondent in obtaining various permissions and consent 2 from Pollution Control Board, and so on. Then considering the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Guruvayoor Devasom Managing Committee & Anr. Vs. C.K. Rajan & Ors., reported in 2003(7) SCC 546 and Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., reported in 2005(1) SCC 590, this Court dismissed that petition. Then a look at Annex.R10/4 depicts the present state of the construction, nature and its extent. In that view of the matter it was pointedly put to learned counsel for the petitioner, as to whether the construction is being raised in violation of the permission granted by the municipal authorities, to which the answer given was, that his case is not even with or without permission, the construction could not at all be raised, rather even permission could not be granted. It would suffice to say, that in view of the dismissal of the earlier writ petition in the year 2005, and thereafter the construction having proceeded ahead a long way, and the present writ petition having been filed as late as on 2.1.2008, we have our own doubts, about bonafides of the petitioner, being a public spirited person, or the present petition being a bonafide public interest litigation. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined 3 to entertain the present writ petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/