1 D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3427/2007 Pushpendra Tiwari V/s State of Raj.& ors. 12.11.2008 Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mr.Narayan Roy Hon'ble Mr.Justice Raghuvendra S.Rathore Mr.Rajneesh Gupta for the petitioner. Mr.Mahendra Singh ) Mr.N.C.Choudhary ) Mr.N.S.Shekhawat ) Mr.Jagmeet Singh )-for the respondents. This public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “It is therefore, most, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and the order dated 22.1.2007 may be quashed and set aside and the respondents may kindly be directed to take necessary action against the respondent no.7 for misusing his power being Sarpanch/Up- sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Khera Thakur under section 38(b) of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and the illegal encroachment made on the piece of land of Gram Panchayat Khera Thakur in Khasra no.407 be removed or demolished and the respondents may kindly be further directed that the piece of land encroached by the respondent no.7 be handed over to Gram Panchayat Khera Thakur and the public way measuring 15 x 95.6 ft. going to Govt. Hospital towards the encroached land be maintained in the interest of public and a proper and necessary step may kindly be taken against the officials who supported the illegal action of the respondent no.7.” At the outset, it is to be noted that the first relief sought by the petitioner in this PIL application is for setting aside the order dated 22nd January, 2007. The said order (Annex.15) has been passed by the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur on a complaint having been received by it. On a specific query made to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he submits that the complaint on 2 which the impugned order dated 22.1.2007 has been passed was made by the present petitioner, although there is no material on record to corroborate the said fact stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, even taking the statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner as it is that the petitioner was complainant and it was on his complaint that the impugned order dated 22nd Jan.2007 was passed, appropriate course for the petitioner is to challenge the order of Panchayati Raj Department in the normal course by filing a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India before a regular Bench. In no case, this public interest litigation challenging the order passed by the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan on the complaint received by it, is maintainable. The other reliefs sought by the petitioner is already a subject matter of the complaint which was filed before the Panchayati Raj Department. Consequently, this PIL petition is dismissed summarily. (Raghuvendra S.Rathore)J. (Narayan Roy)C.J. Parmar