SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 9685

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Tufan Singh Dhurve – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPC No. 3788 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Bharat Lal Dembra
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani

The petitioner lacked locus standi in a public interest litigation regarding school admissions, leading to dismissal.

Headnote:(A) Writ Petition - Directing respondent authorities to allow students to take admission in Hindi Medium - Dispute regarding pending writ petitions challenging Collector's order - Maintainability of petition questioned due to absence of locus standi - Dismissal of petition upheld due to lack of grievance by the petitioner. (Paras 1-8)

(B) PIL - Nature of petition as a public interest litigation, ruled that petitioner, acting as Sarpanch, lacks standing to file in this context. (Paras 7, 8).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, on behalf of village residents, requested directions for starting Hindi Medium sessions at local schools, citing previous court orders as ignored by officials. The petition raised controversy over the petitioner's status as an aggrieved party.

Findings of Court:
The court clarified that the petitioner had no standing and dismissed the case while allowing for re-filing in the proper context.

Issues: The key issue was whether the petitioner had locus standi to file the petition and challenge the school admission process due to pending related cases.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the petitioner was not an aggrieved party and dismissed the petition with liberty for another case.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner sought direction for school admission. (Para 2)
2. disputes and existing petitions impact maintainability. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court analyzed grievance and locus standi. (Para 5 , 6)
4. lack of standing resulted in dismissal of petition. (Para 7 , 8)

Order on Board

22/07/2025

1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ or direction, commanding the respondent authorities to allow the students to take admission in the Hindi Medium at Government Girls Higher Secondary School Semra Block Gaurella District Gaurella-Pendra-Marvahi (C.G.) with immediate effect.

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly further be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or to issue appropriate direction, directing the respondent authorities to take action by obeying the directions issued by this Court in WP(PIL) No. 92/2020 in order to provide justice to the villagers.

10.3 That, any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper as per the nature of the case. An affidavit in support of this writ petition is filed herewith.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition is not made against any specific order but it has been made seeking direction towards the respondents to start session of Hindi Medium at Government Girls Higher Secondary School and Middle School Semra Block Gaurella District- Gaurella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.). It is further submitted that despite direction issued by this Hon’ble Court in WP(PIL) No. 92/2020 and other connected matters dated 06.07.2023 the authorities are not taking any action but only writing letters and therefore this petition is being filed.

3. Learned counsel for the caveator submits that petitioner has suppressed the material facts that there are 3 writ petitions pending before this Court challenging the order of the Collector and this Court has passed the order of protection in favour of the Caveator.

4. Learned Counsel for the State submits that there is a dispute by and between the petitioner and private respondents and the order of the SDO (Revenue) is appealable order under Section 44(1)(b) of C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959, therefore, this petition is not maintainable in the eyes of law.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

6. The petitioner along with other persons made a complaint before the Collector, Gaurella-Pendra-Marwahi on 19.06.2025 (Annexure P/5)

wherein they have stated that:

“dU;k ‘kkldh; gkW;j lsds.Mjh ,oa iwoZ ek/;fed ‘kkyk lsejk esa lapkfyr ugh fd;k tk jgk gS tcfd] vku fjdkMZ ;gka ij Ldwy lapkfyr gS izkpk;Z ds }kjk cPpksa ds Hkfo”; ds lkFk f[kyokM+ fd;k tk jgk gS bl laca/k esa iwoZ esa fnukad 10-06-2025 dks ljiap ,oa xzkeokfl;ksa ds }kjk vkosnu fn;k x;k Fkk larks”ktud fu.kZ; vHkh rd ugh vk;k gS vxj ,d lIrkg ds vUnj Ldwy lapkyu ugh gqvk rks xzkeokfl;ksa ds }kjk pDdk tke fd;k tk,xkA ftldh lEiw.kZ tokcnkjh ‘kklu iz’kklu dh gksxhA”

7. It is crystal clear from the grievance fo the petitioner that he is not an aggrieved person. The petitioner has filed the instant petition in the capacity of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Semra, District Gaurella-

Pendra-Marwahi and on behalf of the residents of village Semra. The present petition is in the sketch of PIL and there is no locus standi.

8. Therefore, the present petition is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate petition before appropriate Bench having roaster.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top