Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri B.K. Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution has been filed as Public Interest Litigation. Petitioner is a Corporator of Nagar Nigam, Lucknow representing Gomti Nagar area. The grievance of petitioner is that authorities concerned involved in Public Utility Services are digging up roads with the permission of Lucknow Nagar Nigam who also collect road cutting charges from such persons but repair or resurfacing of roads is not carried out for long or many times not at all causing tremendous inconvenience to vehicular traffic as well as pedestrians and many times it results in serious mishaps.

3. It is said that no person has any authority or right to cut or damage roads without permission of Municipal Commissioner by virtue of Sections 293, 295, 300 of Uttar Pradesh Nagam Nigam Adhiniyam, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as “U.P. Act 1959”). There are no prescribed rates for road cutting of Nagar Nigam, Lucknow but rates prevailing in U.P.Public Works Department (hereinafter referred to as”UPPWD”) are made applicable and adopted by Nagar Nigam, Lucknow relating to road cutting which are as under:

S. No.	Nature of road	New rates (per metre) w.e.f. 1.4.2008	Old rates (per metre) prior to 1.4.2008
1.	Rubber road cutting	2,247	1,525
2.	Premixing	1,428	1,040
3.	Interlocking	1,446	915
4.	C.C. Road	1,035	735
5.	BOE	950	950
6.	Kachcha	570	570

4. It is said that every year crores of rupees are received by Nagar Nigam, Lucknow under the head of “road cutting charges” but requisite repair or resurfacing is not carried out. In effect entire amount collected by Nagar Nigam, Lucknow is not used for the purpose, the same is meant, but diverted elsewhere. In para 8, petitioner has given a chart showing amount of road cutting received by Nagar Nigam in different financial years commencing from 2001-02 to 2007-08 as under:

S. No.	Financial Year	Amount in rupees (in lacs)
1.	2001-02	202.10
2.	2002-03	211.20
3.	2003-04	212.42
4.	2004-05	129.75
5.	2005-06	225.08
6.	2006-07	145.75
7.	2007-08	50.00 till January

5. He has also pleaded that a large number of contractors of different private companies, after paying road cutting charges for a smaller part of roads i.e. 200-500 metres, actually cut roads much larger to the extent i.e. 3 - 5 kms. Moreover, these Contractors do not pay full charges in one stroke. Instead, make payment in part and in so many cases petitioner has found that on the basis of forged and fabricated papers large number of roads have been damaged by such Contractors.

6. Petitioner also sent letters dated 1.1.2008 and 7.1.2008 for realization of road cutting charges from Private Firms but no action was taken by concerned authorities despite representation made even to Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikas also. Petitioner also sent letter dated 25.2.2008 to Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow requesting to get an inquiry conducted against those persons who have damaged roads without making payment of “road cutting charges”and officers who have permitted such illegality to perpetuate. Mayor, Nagar Nigam Lucknow vide letter dated 1.7.2008 informed Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow that under the instructions of Government an enquiry is already being conducted against Airtel Company having indulged in road cutting without permission of Nagar Nigam and without deposit of requisite charges and appropriate action will be taken as per enquiry report. However, despite orders of Principal Secretary, no such enquiry has been concluded and matter virtually stood closed by authorities of Nagar Nigam, Lucknow.

7. Petitioner also came to know that under influence of some powerful persons, authorities o