Shri NKAgrawaI, Dy. Advocate General for the State. . " O R D E R' (27th February, 2008) The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Rakev Gupta, C.J. Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. 2) Petitioner Ashok Kashyap claiming himself as a social worker hasvtiled this writ petition styled as ‘Public Interest ' Litigation’ in the year 2006 for the following reliefs : L 1. To call for the entire records from the State authorities regarding the Food Park Project. 2. To pinpoint the fault and fix liability on the officer/authority concerned and realize the amount from him with interest to be refunded to State exchequer. 3. To issue direction to Respondent No.6 to refund the entire money released with interest to the State exchequer. r 4. To issue direction to the concerned department to initiate departmental action against the erring officerslnon-officials. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct for appointment of judicial enquiry in the project. 6. Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, may be provided to the petitioner. 3) The petitioner in substance is alleging commission of irregularities by the respondents in establishing Food Park Project at Durg and Rajnandg‘aon. Petitioner has made vague ‘ A aliegations in that behaif in paras 5.3 to 5.8, without fTiEng any supporting material with writ petition. 4) Petition'. We, therefore, decline to entertain the writ petition fiied as PIL. 5) and is hereby dismissed summarily. 5) petitioner be refunded to him. i Sunii Kumar Sinha Judge The writ petition, in our opinion, is a ‘Haif—Baked The writ petition, therefore, is iiabie to be dismissed The security amount of Rs.2,000/— deposited by the Sdle Chief Justice i sul- ’i