Facts
The petitioner filed a Public Interest Litigation concerning alleged illegal extraction and storage of sand in Chhattisgarh.
Source reference: para. 2He sought directions to restrain mine-lease holders and sand-storage permit holders from extracting sand beyond their allotted areas, verify the quantity of sand available in the relevant khasra numbers, scrutinize and compare transit passes, seize vehicles allegedly used for unauthorized extraction, and inquire into alleged improper levy of fines and charges in overloading cases.
Source reference: para. 2The petition was heard by the Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice and another Judge.
Source reference: para. 3During hearing, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petition had become infructuous.
Source reference: para. 3Issues
Whether the Public Interest Litigation seeking directions against alleged illegal sand extraction, irregularities in transit passes, seizure of vehicles, and inquiry into alleged improper charges had become infructuous.
Source reference: paras. 2–3Whether any further relief or directions were required from the Court in view of the petitioner’s submission that the petition had become infructuous.
Source reference: paras. 3–4Law Applied
The Court applied the procedural principle that a writ petition which has become infructuous does not require adjudication on the merits and may be dismissed accordingly.
Source reference: paras. 3–4No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order; the decision was based on the petitioner’s statement that the reliefs sought no longer survived for consideration.
Source reference: paras. 3–4Reasoning
The reliefs claimed in the petition related to supervision and enforcement against alleged unauthorized sand extraction and related administrative irregularities.
Source reference: para. 2However, the petitioner’s counsel expressly informed the Court that the petition had become infructuous.
Source reference: para. 3In the absence of any surviving controversy requiring adjudication, the Court declined to examine the allegations or issue the requested administrative and enforcement directions.
Source reference: para. 4The petition was therefore disposed of on the ground of infructuousness rather than on the merits.
Source reference: para. 4Holding
The Court accepted the petitioner’s submission that the Public Interest Litigation had become infructuous and dismissed WPPIL No. 93 of 2022 accordingly.
No directions were issued regarding sand extraction, transit-pass verification, vehicle seizure, or inquiry into alleged improper fines and charges.
Source reference: para. 4Original Court PDF
RAMBILAS JAISWALvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
