Public interest litigation dismissed as infructuous after the petitioner conceded that the relief had become moot.

The petitioner filed a Public Interest Litigation concerning alleged illegal extraction and storage of sand in Chhattisgarh.

He 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.

The petition was heard by the Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice and another Judge.

During hearing, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petition had become infructuous.

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.

No 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.

The reliefs claimed in the petition related to supervision and enforcement against alleged unauthorized sand extraction and related administrative irregularities.

However, the petitioner’s counsel expressly informed the Court that the petition had become infructuous.

In the absence of any surviving controversy requiring adjudication, the Court declined to examine the allegations or issue the requested administrative and enforcement directions.

The petition was therefore disposed of on the ground of infructuousness rather than on the merits.

No directions were issued regarding sand extraction, transit-pass verification, vehicle seizure, or inquiry into alleged improper fines and charges.