Digbai Tandi vs State of Chhattisgarh - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 10402

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 10402

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Digbai Tandi – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPPIL No. 79 of 2025

Important Points

A petition under Article 226 requires all necessary parties to be included; failure to do so may result in dismissal.

Subject

Constitutional Law - Public Interest Litigation

Act Referred

Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 25, Article 19(1)(d)

Headnote

In this Public Interest Litigation filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners sought to declare certain hoardings unconstitutional under Articles 25 and 19(1)(d). The court found that the relevant Gram Panchayats were not parties to the case and thus dismissed the petition as withdrawn with liberty to refile. The court observed that without the inclusion of necessary parties, the petition could not proceed. The final ruling confirmed that the security amount would be refunded to the petitioners.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ashish Beck
For the Respondents:Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Addl. Advocate General

Table of Content
1. necessary parties must be included in petitions. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. petitions may be dismissed if proper parties are not included. (Para 5)
3. security deposits are subject to refund upon dismissal. (Para 6)

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

08.09.2025

1. Heard Mr. Ashish Beck, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Y.S. Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondents.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India styled as Public Interest Litigation, seeking following reliefs :-

“(i) Call for the relevant records of the case.

(ii) Declare that the hoardings set out in para 8.2 of this petition are unconstitutional, illegal and in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25 and 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India .

(iii) Directing the respondents to remove the illegal hoardings above mentioned.

(iv) Directing the respondent authorities particularly the Collector and Superintendent of Police, District Kanker to visit the villages where the above mentioned hoardings have been erected and convene a meeting with the villagers/stake holders for the purpose of restoration of peace and harmony among different communities in order to instill a sense of security among Christians in the district of Kanker.

(iv) Pass any other order(s) which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. As preliminary objection has been raised by learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondents that the respective Gram Panchayats, who have placed the alleged hoardings, have not been party and in the earlier writ petition which was filed being WPC No. 1759 of 2014, the concerned Gram Panchayat was made a party and so far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, it is stated that he is resident of Village – Havechur, Gram Panchayat – Bondanar, Tehsil – Antagarh, District – Kanker, he would have filed writ petition with the nomenclature ‘WPC’.

4. So far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has filed the present petition as he has no personal interest in the matter, but as the respective Gram Panchayats have not been made party, descriptions of which have been made in para No.8.2 of writ petition, the present petition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file duly constituted petition with appropriate parties.

5. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

6. Security amount deposited by the petitioners shall be refunded back to the petitioners.