Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 95028 (ALL)

HARI PRATAP YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/32711/2025 · 2025-09-16

Amitabh Kumar Rai, Saral Srivastava

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32711 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has has prayed for the following relief:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the e-tender notice dated 13 06.2025 in regard to Gata No. 407-M, Khand No. 1, area ad-measuring 2.22 hectare situated in Village Ginj, Tehsil Bara, District Prayagraj. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the authorities not to permit any mining and blasting activity for sand stone Quartzite Ballast Gitii in the Gata No. 407-M, Khand No. 1, area ad- measuring 2.22 hectare situated 111 the Environmentally Eco Sensitive Area and within radius of residential area. (iii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; (iv) Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner." 3. When the learned counsel for the petitioner was confronted as to how the petitioner is aggrieved by the e-tender notice dated 13 06.2025, he could not demonstrate from the record that the petitioner is aggrieved by e-tender notice, however, he submits that the impact of blasting activity would result in causing danger to the nearby localities, therefore, it is causing public Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Birendra Singh, Swati Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Hari Pratap Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) nuisance. He submits that the present petition may be dismissed as not pressed as the petitioner wishes to prefer a Public Interest Litigation. 4. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with the aforesaid liberty. September 17, 2025 NS WRIC No. 32711 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad