Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2590 (ALL)

PRADEEP KUMAR TIWARI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

WPIL/1155/2026 · 2026-05-04

Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1155 of 2026 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. This petition purportedly in public interest has been filed by the petitioner seeking enforcement of order dated 12.09.2023 passed by the U.P. Pollution Control Board ('Board') against respondent no. 6. 2. Submissions have been made that though the order was passed for closing down the brick-kiln way back on 12.09.2023 and communication was made to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Respondent No. 4 by the Board requiring him to close down the brick-kiln, no action in this regard has been taken and, therefore, the respondents be directed to ensure that the brick-kiln is closed down. 3. A perusal of the petition indicates that the petitioner has indicated his address as Village & Post Ekil, P.S. Pakdi, Tehsil Sikandarpur, District Ballia and the brick-kiln in question is situated at Village Narhani Turkwalia, Post Jumai, Tehsil Sikandarpur, District Ballia. Nowhere in the petition, the petitioner has indicated his credentials and as to how despite being a resident of different village, he is affected by the said brick-kiln and alleged non-compliance of the directions issued by the Board. The only indication made in the petition is that the petitioner was filing the petition in the interest of public at large as several persons of the village, aggrieved by the inaction of the authority, illegal and unauthorized running of brick-kiln have put their problem before the petitioner as a reason for filing the present petition. In the affidavit, the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajitabh Kumar Choubey, Braj Bhushan Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sudhanshu Srivastava, A.C.S.C., Hari Nath Tripathi, Sarthak Singh Pradeep Kumar Tiwari .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and 5 others .....Respondent(s) petitioner has indicated his occupation as social worker. 4. Claiming occupation as social worker at the age of 34 years and filing of petition pertaining to a different village necessarily means that filing of the petition or raising public issues have been made a means of earning livelihood by the petitioner. 5. Filing of petitions in the nature of public interest by the petitioner claiming himself to be a social worker and social work as his occupation, cannot be countenanced. 6. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. May 5, 2026 Sandeep/Sazia WPIL No. 1155 of 2026 2 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad