1 2025:CGHC:8577-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 30 of 2025 Vijay Singh Thakur S/o Late M.R. Thakur Aged About 48 Years R/o Ward No. 06, Schoolpara, Baikunthpur District Koriya Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Department Of Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development Through Secretary, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Chhattisgarh State Election Commission Through Its Secretary, Nirvachan Bhawan, Sector 19, North Block Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Advocate General along with Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Addl. A.G. For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Samarth Singh Marhas, Advocate Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN 2 Hon'ble S hri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 19/02/2025 1. The present Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for declaring/reading down the provisions of Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 for its apply to the Scheduled-V areas of State of Chhattisgarh, so that no election can be conducted for Municipalities in the Scheduled-V area and no Municipalities can function in the Scheduled-V area. 2. The petitioner himself is a Tribal Rights Activist and belongs to Gond Tribe and the President of Gond Rachnatmak Kalyan Samiti, Baikunthpur, District Korea, so also the Secretary of Sarva Adiwasi Samaj, which is an association of Tribals of Chhattisgarh having the aim of promoting and protecting the interest of Tribals in Chhattisgarh. He had earlier filed another WP(PIL) No. 90 of 2019 for the relief of declaring/reading down the provisions of M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 for applying it to the scheduled areas of State of Chhattisgarh. The said petition was dismissed holding that provisions of Part IX-A of the Constitution of India do not extent to scheduled areas. 3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner in the interest of tribals of Chhattisgarh, particularly who are residents of Scheduled Areas of Chhattisgarh. The reliefs sought by the petitioner in the 3 present petition are as under :- “1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue direction that the Municipal bodies mentioned in para 8.17 of the petition cannot function and their constitution and functioning is unconstitutional by issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders or direction/directions. 2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an order that holding of Municipal Election in Schedule-V areas is unconstitutional by issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders or direction/ directions. 3. Any other relief/relief's which Hon'ble court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 4. On the pointed query being made with respect to maintainability of the present PIL with the aforesaid prayer, learned counsel for the petitioner could not give any satisfactory reply. However, he seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with the liberty to approach before the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. He further submits that the security amount, which has been deposited in the present PIL may also be refunded to him. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents have not raised any objection with respect to the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the both the parties and perused the record. 7. Considering the fact that the petitioner, who himself claims to be a social worker in Para 3 of the petition and had not made any 4 homework and filed the present petition, so also the fact that the present petition is not maintainable as Public Interest Litigation, therefore, the present writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to approach before the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. It is further directed that the Registry shall refund half of the the security amount (i.e. Rs. 7,500/-) deposited by the petitioner in the present petition, forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved