HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1103 of 2025 Court No. - 20 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Suresh Chandra Kushwaha, learned Standing Counsel for respondents nos.1 to 5. 2. By means of the present petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, the petitioners have prayed for following relief: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite party nos.1, 2 and 3 to initiate steps to construct the Khadanja on Chak Marg having land Gata No. 837Ka/0.0820 hectare Village Ajmalpur, Pargana Surhurpur, Block Bhiyaon, Tahsil Jalalpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar, within specified time and to protect the common rights of villagers, in the interest of justice. (ii) Issue a writ, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties concerned to decide the representation made by the petitioner which is pending before the opposite parties contained as annexure no.1 to this writ petition." 2. At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present Public Interest Litigation as the petitioners have not disclosed the credentials and other details that are required under Sub-Rule (3-A) of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules (Rules of Court, 1952), which has been amended in the light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttranchal versus Balwant Singh Chaufal & others reported in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh Anand Kumar Sharma And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Of Village Deve. Deptt. Lko And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) 2010 AIR SCW 1029. He has also relied upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Deenbandhu Samgra Swasthya Avam Siksha Shodh Sansthan versus Union of India and others; reported in 2025 SCC OnLine All 3541. 3. Confronted with the aforesaid objection, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that at this stage, he does not want to press this petition and prayed for the dismissal of the same as withdrawn. 4. The prayer for withdrawal of the present petition made by learned counsel for the petitioners is accepted. 5. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn. December 2, 2025 Abhishek Gupta WPIL No. 1103 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench