^ AT DiVISION BENCH SHRj CJ. HON'BLE SHRi SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. PETITI RESPONDENTS !;fc. WP (C) NQ.424/2009. M/s DK;Singh, Registered Partnership Firm, Through; one of its partner nameiy jVlkas Singh S/o Avadhesh Slngh, aged about 25 years, Artjson Biock West ChirmirE Colliery, Dlstrict Korea (CG) Versu_s 1. 2. 3. 4. State of Chhattisgarh, through CoJlector, Korea (CG) Munldpal Corporation Chlrmiri, Distnct Korea(CG) Through Its Commissioner, Municipai Corporation Chirimiri, District Korea (CG) Commissioner, Munlcipal Corporation, Chirmiri, Korea (CG) !VI/s Gopai Singh, A registerecl Firm, through its Proprietor nameiy Gopa! Singh S7o Late Shri Parikshit Singh, R/o New B Type, West Chirmiri, District Korea (CG) : Praven Kumar Upadhyay S/o Not known to the petitioner R/o Telipara, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) Writ Petjtion under Artlcle226 of the Constitution of india Present: Shn EVIanoj Paranjpe, iearned counsel for the petitioner. Shri JK Giida, Additiona! Advocate Generai for the State / respondent No.1. ORDER ^ (19mFebruary,2009) The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. -. •; ' . . ILearned counsel forthe oarties are heard on admissiori. ^fc :^' 2) Petitioner DK Singh has ! fiied this writ petition for the foliowing reliefs: !<1) Tbat, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pjeased to set-aside the decision of the respondent corporation accepting the tender of the respondent no.4 & 5 and the contract resulting from such acceptance and the Hon'bie Court may kindly be pteased to set-aside the work orders dated jssued In favour of respondent No.4 & 5. 2) That, thls Hon'ble Court may kindiy be pteased otcali for the entire records in respect of the instant case. 3) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindiy be pleased to for CBI inquiry against the officers of MunEcipal Corporation, Chirmiri District Koreswho are involved in the dedsion making process for awarding the instant contract, and petitioner may kindjy be awarded the remaining contract. 4) That, the Hon'ble court may kindiy be pleased to grant any reiief, v^hich is deem frt and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 3) The petitioner, thus in substance is seeking an enquiry in the award of contract by respondents No.2 & 3 in favour of respondents No.4 & 5 alleging commission of irregularities and illegaiities by respondents No.2 & 3. 4) For ascertaining the correctness of the ailegations made by the petitioner against respondents No.2 & 3, a 'fact flnding enquiry'wouid be necessary. 5) Sueh a 'fact findingenquiry'can be better conducted by 'LokAyog'. 6) In our opinion, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to approach !Lok Ayog' for the redressa! of his grievances projected in the writ petition. ^ 3! 7) Wlth the above observatlon, the writ petition stands dlsposed of. • padma Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil KumarSinha Judge ^_. i^"