GAGANDEEP SINGH @ GAGANDEEP SINGH BAGGA vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WA No.

323 of 2023 Gagandeep Singh @ Gagandeep Singh Bagga S/o Shri Jagdish Singh Bagga Aged About 37 Years Caste Sikh, Occupation Business (Sikh Sewadar), R/o Village Shivnandanpur (Main Road Bishrampur), P.S. and Post Bishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.) ---- Appellant Versus 1.

The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Rural Development, New Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2.

The Secretary Department of Tribal, Development, New Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3.

The Collector Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 4.

The Superintendent of Police District Surajpur (C.G.) 5.

The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat- Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 6.

The Assistant Commissioner Department of Tribal Welfare, Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 7.

The Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.) Sub Division Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 8.

The Sub Divisional Officer Rural Engineering Service, Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 9.

The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 10.

The Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Shivnandanpur, Janpad Panchayat Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 11.

The Secretary Gram Panchayat Shivnandanpur, Janpad Panchayat Surajpur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 12.

The President Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee Shivnandanpur, Ward No.

16, Bishrampur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 13.

Sardar Ranveer Singh Bhamra S/o Shri Karnall Singh Bhamra Aged About 59 Years Ex-President, Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee Shivnandanpur, Ward No.

Surajpur (C.G.) R/o Shivnandanpur, Ward No.

Surajpur (C.G.) 14.

Sardar Daljeet Singh S/o Late Harbansh Singh Aged About 64 Years Ex-Secretary, Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee- Shivnandanpur, Ward No.

Surajpur (C.G.) 2 15. .G.) 2 15.

Paramjeet Singh (Pamme) S/o Late Habansh Singh Aged About 58 Years Ex-Joint Secretary, Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee- Shivnandanpur, Ward No.

Surajpur (C.G.) R/o SECL 1-C Colony, Bishrampur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 16.

Sardar Jasbir Singh Aged About 47 Years Ex-Secretary, Gurudwara Prpabandhan Committee-Shivnandanpur, Ward No.

Surajpur (C.G.) R/o Main Market, Shivnandanpur, Bishrampur, Distt.

Surajpur (C.G.) 17.

Paramjeet Singh S/o Shri Sukhdev Singh R/o Quarter No.

1B-227, Secl Hospital Colony, Ex-Joint Cashier, Gurudwara Committee, At Present Cashier of Gurudwara Committee, Bishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.) ---- Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr.

A.

N.

Bhakta, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr.

Gurudev I.

Sharan, Govt.

Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri N.

K.

Chandravanshi , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J.

08.08.2023 1.

Heard Mr.

Bhakta, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.

Sharan, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents.

2.

The present intra Court appeal has been filed against the order dated 21.06.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(S) No.

2763 of 2023 (Gagandeep Singh Vs.

State of Chhattisgarh & others), whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner.

3 3.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is erroneous as the the learned Single Judge held that the appellant has no any individual right and that the respondent Nos.

13 to 17 are not the individual members of the Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee, though the alleged persons have already been misused and misappropriate the funds by using fake and false Measurement Book (MB) and withdrawn the government money and falsely showing the work, which has already been done by the appellant as per the request o request of the then Gurudwara Committee members, who have already been arrayed as respondent Nos.

13 to 17.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.

5.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, perused the impugned judgment and materials available on record.

6.

The learned Single Judge after hearing learned counsel for the parties and on the basis of materials available on record has rightly dismissed the writ petition observing as follows : “Considering the nature of relief sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition, this court is of the opinion that no individual right of the petitioner seems to have been adversely affected so far as the allegations made against the private respondents are concerned.

The nature of relief is more in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation.

4 The writ petition therefore would not be maintainable for the reason that the relief sought for is only for directing the respondents to conduct an enquiry in respect of the alleged illegalities and irregularities committed by the respondents No.13 to 17, none of whom are individual members of the Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee.

The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed as not maintainable reserving the right of the petitioner to avail such other remedies available to him under law.” 7.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusing the impugned order and materials available on record, we do not find any illegality or infirminty in the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge.

8.

Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/- Sd/- (N.K.

Chandravanshi) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra