LUCKNOW vs U.I.O.Thru Secy.Min.Of Environment And Forest

Shri Ram Leela Committee Thru.Secy.Badri Vishal Gupta And Anr. .....Petitioner(s) Versus U.O.I.Thru.Secy.Ministry Of Railway New Delhi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shailendra Kumar Misra, Anurag Narain Counsel for Respondent(s) : Shiv P. Shukla, Brijesh Kumar Shukla, Mahendra Kumar Mishra . WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3624 of 2020 Shyama Prasanna Sen Versus .....Petitioner(s) U.O.I.Thru.Secy.Ministry Of Railway New Delhi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rajendra Singh Kushwaha : C.S.C., Shiv P.Shukla WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 3 WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4285 of 2020 Rajeev Gupta Versus .....Petitioner(s) U.O.I. Through Ministry Of Railway New Delhi And Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sushil Kumar Singh : Shiv P. Shukla, Brijesh Kumar Shukla, Mahendra Kumar Mishra . WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4365 of 2020 Tarai Vikas Sansthan Thru. Satya Prakash Srivastava Versus .....Petitioner(s) U.O.I. Through Secy. Ministry Of Railways New Delhi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Shanker Tewari, Sheo Pal Singh, Counsel for Respondent(s) Court No. - 1 Vishwakant Srivastava : C.S.C., Brijesh Kumar Shukla, Mahendra Kumar Mishra, Shiv P. Shukla HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. WPIL No. 25691 of 2018

1. None appears for the petitioners to press this public interest litigation.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of 4 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 India is present.

3. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in 2018 seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ order or direction on the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 and 3 to construct a chain linked fence around Pilibhit Tiger Reserve, Dudhwa National Park and Katarniya Wildlife Sanctuary. (ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to construct a wildlife corridor in the State of U.P. primarily for the "Tigers" and for construction of lengthwise chain linked fencing on the periphery of such corridor which would act as a physical barrier to prevent the tigers from straying and interacting from the public insider the corridor."

4. We have perused the earlier orders passed in this writ petition, especially, the order dated 08.03.2019 which reads as under:- "In compliance of Court's orders Ms. Kalpana Awasthi, Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest is present before this Court. She has informed that the apprehension shown by the petitioner on the basis of some news paper reports are not founded on facts. She has made statement that Chief Secretary held a meeting yesterday with the authorities involved including the railways, Environment and Forest etc. and she is making statement that no activity is being visualized in future in the form of heritage train/toy train as adventure or tourist programme. Since statement has been made by a senior most officer, we do not find that any further orders in this regard are necessary. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to bring on record along with affidavit any other material which he wants to present before this Court. List after two weeks. The appearance of the officer present today is exempted."

5. Except for opposite parties no. 3 to 7 no other opposite parties have 5 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 filed their counter affidavit.

6. Having gone through the counter affidavit of opposite parties no. 3 to 7 we are of the opinion that the petitioners may, if there is a cause, approach the concerned opposite party by way of a representation raising the grievance and claiming the relief as sought herein which shall be considered as per law and a speedy decision shall be taken, say, within a period of four months of submission of such application.

7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 2293 of 2007

1. Heard Ms. Sweta Mishra holding brief of Shri Anurag Narain, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the relief sought in this writ petition no. 2293 of 2007 has already been achieved, therefore, the writ petition be disposed of as infructuous.

3. According, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. WPIL No. 3189 of 2007

1. None appears for the petitioners to press this writ petition.

2. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in the year 2007 seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Opposite Parties to get the census of the Tigers done from an independent agency namely Center for Wild Life Studies, 26-2, Agha Abbas Road, Bangalore. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to allocate Rs. 15 crores annually for Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve. 6 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to stop the vehicular traffic within the Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve and reallocate the Road as shown in Red Colour in the Map as contained in Annexure No. 10 to the present Writ Petition. (iv) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Party No. 2 for reallocating the Railway Line from Palia to Dudhwa and thereafter to Belryan and reallocate the same outside the Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve as shown in the Map marked within Green lines contained in Annexure No. 10 to the writ petition. (v) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to remove the 'Tharus' of surma village from the vicinity of the Dudhwa national Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve within a specified period of time. (vi) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to complete the Electric Fencing around the Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve within a specified period of time. (vii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties for desiltation of Neora and Nagrol (Donda) rivers flowing through the Dudhwa National Park/ Dudhwa Tiger Reserve within a specified period of time. (viii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to sanction funds to establish an Intelligence Agency/ Watchers/Informers to inform about the poachers of Tigers, within the Dudhwa Park/ Dudhwa Tiger Reserve."

3. Much time has lapsed when the writ petition was filed, therefore, it appears that issue raised in this writ petition may have outlived its utility, as, none has appeared today on behalf of the petitioners, one of whom petitioner no. 1 appears to be no more. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 1- Department of Environment and Forest, Government of India. We have perused the same. 7 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018

4. Another counter affidavit has been filed by opposite party no. 2- Ministry of Railways, Government of India.

5. No rejoinder affidavit has been filed.

6. If the cause still remains the petitioners may approach the concerned Ministry or the Department raising the same which can be looked appropriately.

7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 1011 of 2016

1. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

3. It appears that due to passage of time the writ petition has lost its efficacy.

4. The writ petition is disposed of with the observations and liberty that the cause of action, if any, still remains the petitioner may either move an application for recall of this order or approach the concerned authority for redressal of the grievance in public interest. WPIL No. 3555 of 2020

1. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

3. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in the year 2020 seeking the following reliefs:- "i. A Writ, order or direction of Mandamus or in the nature of Mandamus, 8 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 commanding the respondents to complete the task of diversion within the stipulated time period at the earliest which is found suitable by this Hon'ble Court. ii. Issue a Writ, order or direction of Mandamus or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to stop the operation of train between Mailani to Nanpara on the existing Rail line until diversion of the Railway line through Paliya Majhagain, Nighasan Dhaurahara, Mihipuruwa is completed."

4. It seems that the writ petition has outlived its utility with efflux of time. If the cause and grievance still remains the petitioner may seek a recall of this order or approach the concerned Authorities/ Ministries for redressal of the same.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 3624 of 2020

1. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

3. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in the year 2020 seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in public interest thereby commanding the opposite parties no. 1 to 3, not to stop the train services Mailani- Nanpars section as soon as when train operations start on Lakhimpur- Mailani sections, it is desirable in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of public at large. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction to the opposite parties, firstly they complete/construct the bypass rail track between the Palia-Belrayan stations, before closing the train services in Mailani-Panpara section or before starting in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of public at large." 9 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018

4. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Authorities/ Ministries for redressal of the grievance if the cause still subsists or to seek recall of this order within a reasonable time, say, within a period of three months. WPIL No. 4285 of 2020

1. Shri S.B.Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

2. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition, presumably because with passage of time the writ petition has lost its efficacy. If the cause still remains the petitioner may approach the concerned Authorities for redressal of the same or seek a recall of this order within reasonable time, say, within a period of three months.

3. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 4365 of 2020

1. Heard Shri Anchal Srivastava holding brief of Shri Ravi Shankar Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.B.Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to two affidavits filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 1 to 3. We have carefully gone through the affidavit.

3. After having gone through the affidavits we see no reason to proceed any further in this PIL, especially as, no rejoinder affidavit has been filed in response thereto. Various decisions have been taken from time to time as mentioned in the affidavit dated 06.03.2020 and another affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 3 dated 07.03.2020. If any cause or grievance still remains the petitioner may approach the concerned Ministry or Departments for redressal of the same or seek a recall of this order within a reasonable time, say, within a period of three months giving specific reason as to what more needs to done which is not being 10 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 done by the opposite parties in respect of the subject matter.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. November 11, 2025 R.K.P. (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shri Ram Leela Committee Thru.Secy.Badri Vishal Gupta And Anr. .....Petitioner(s) Versus U.O.I.Thru.Secy.Ministry Of Railway New Delhi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shailendra Kumar Misra, Anurag Narain Counsel for Respondent(s) : Shiv P. Shukla, Brijesh Kumar Shukla, Mahendra Kumar Mishra . WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3624 of 2020 Shyama Prasanna Sen Versus .....Petitioner(s) U.O.I.Thru.Secy.Ministry Of Railway New Delhi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rajendra Singh Kushwaha : C.S.C., Shiv P.Shukla WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 3 WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4285 of 2020 Rajeev Gupta Versus .....Petitioner(s) U.O.I. Through Ministry Of Railway New Delhi And Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sushil Kumar Singh : Shiv P. Shukla, Brijesh Kumar Shukla, Mahendra Kumar Mishra . WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4365 of 2020 Tarai Vikas Sansthan Thru. Satya Prakash Srivastava Versus .....Petitioner(s) U.O.I. Through Secy. Ministry Of Railways New Delhi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Shanker Tewari, Sheo Pal Singh, Counsel for Respondent(s) Court No. - 1 Vishwakant Srivastava : C.S.C., Brijesh Kumar Shukla, Mahendra Kumar Mishra, Shiv P. Shukla HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. WPIL No. 25691 of 2018

1. None appears for the petitioners to press this public interest litigation.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of 4 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 India is present.

3. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in 2018 seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ order or direction on the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 and 3 to construct a chain linked fence around Pilibhit Tiger Reserve, Dudhwa National Park and Katarniya Wildlife Sanctuary. (ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to construct a wildlife corridor in the State of U.P. primarily for the "Tigers" and for construction of lengthwise chain linked fencing on the periphery of such corridor which would act as a physical barrier to prevent the tigers from straying and interacting from the public insider the corridor."

4. We have perused the earlier orders passed in this writ petition, especially, the order dated 08.03.2019 which reads as under:- "In compliance of Court's orders Ms. Kalpana Awasthi, Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest is present before this Court. She has informed that the apprehension shown by the petitioner on the basis of some news paper reports are not founded on facts. She has made statement that Chief Secretary held a meeting yesterday with the authorities involved including the railways, Environment and Forest etc. and she is making statement that no activity is being visualized in future in the form of heritage train/toy train as adventure or tourist programme. Since statement has been made by a senior most officer, we do not find that any further orders in this regard are necessary. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to bring on record along with affidavit any other material which he wants to present before this Court. List after two weeks. The appearance of the officer present today is exempted."

5. Except for opposite parties no. 3 to 7 no other opposite parties have 5 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 filed their counter affidavit.

6. Having gone through the counter affidavit of opposite parties no. 3 to 7 we are of the opinion that the petitioners may, if there is a cause, approach the concerned opposite party by way of a representation raising the grievance and claiming the relief as sought herein which shall be considered as per law and a speedy decision shall be taken, say, within a period of four months of submission of such application.

7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 2293 of 2007

1. Heard Ms. Sweta Mishra holding brief of Shri Anurag Narain, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the relief sought in this writ petition no. 2293 of 2007 has already been achieved, therefore, the writ petition be disposed of as infructuous.

3. According, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. WPIL No. 3189 of 2007

1. None appears for the petitioners to press this writ petition.

2. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in the year 2007 seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Opposite Parties to get the census of the Tigers done from an independent agency namely Center for Wild Life Studies, 26-2, Agha Abbas Road, Bangalore. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to allocate Rs. 15 crores annually for Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve. 6 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to stop the vehicular traffic within the Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve and reallocate the Road as shown in Red Colour in the Map as contained in Annexure No. 10 to the present Writ Petition. (iv) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Party No. 2 for reallocating the Railway Line from Palia to Dudhwa and thereafter to Belryan and reallocate the same outside the Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve as shown in the Map marked within Green lines contained in Annexure No. 10 to the writ petition. (v) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to remove the 'Tharus' of surma village from the vicinity of the Dudhwa national Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve within a specified period of time. (vi) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to complete the Electric Fencing around the Dudhwa National Park/Dudhwa Tiger Reserve within a specified period of time. (vii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties for desiltation of Neora and Nagrol (Donda) rivers flowing through the Dudhwa National Park/ Dudhwa Tiger Reserve within a specified period of time. (viii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to sanction funds to establish an Intelligence Agency/ Watchers/Informers to inform about the poachers of Tigers, within the Dudhwa Park/ Dudhwa Tiger Reserve."

3. Much time has lapsed when the writ petition was filed, therefore, it appears that issue raised in this writ petition may have outlived its utility, as, none has appeared today on behalf of the petitioners, one of whom petitioner no. 1 appears to be no more. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 1- Department of Environment and Forest, Government of India. We have perused the same. 7 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018

4. Another counter affidavit has been filed by opposite party no. 2- Ministry of Railways, Government of India.

5. No rejoinder affidavit has been filed.

6. If the cause still remains the petitioners may approach the concerned Ministry or the Department raising the same which can be looked appropriately.

7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 1011 of 2016

1. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

3. It appears that due to passage of time the writ petition has lost its efficacy.

4. The writ petition is disposed of with the observations and liberty that the cause of action, if any, still remains the petitioner may either move an application for recall of this order or approach the concerned authority for redressal of the grievance in public interest. WPIL No. 3555 of 2020

1. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

3. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in the year 2020 seeking the following reliefs:- "i. A Writ, order or direction of Mandamus or in the nature of Mandamus, 8 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 commanding the respondents to complete the task of diversion within the stipulated time period at the earliest which is found suitable by this Hon'ble Court. ii. Issue a Writ, order or direction of Mandamus or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to stop the operation of train between Mailani to Nanpara on the existing Rail line until diversion of the Railway line through Paliya Majhagain, Nighasan Dhaurahara, Mihipuruwa is completed."

4. It seems that the writ petition has outlived its utility with efflux of time. If the cause and grievance still remains the petitioner may seek a recall of this order or approach the concerned Authorities/ Ministries for redressal of the same.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 3624 of 2020

1. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition.

2. Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

3. This writ petition styled as public interest litigation was filed in the year 2020 seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in public interest thereby commanding the opposite parties no. 1 to 3, not to stop the train services Mailani- Nanpars section as soon as when train operations start on Lakhimpur- Mailani sections, it is desirable in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of public at large. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction to the opposite parties, firstly they complete/construct the bypass rail track between the Palia-Belrayan stations, before closing the train services in Mailani-Panpara section or before starting in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of public at large." 9 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018

4. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Authorities/ Ministries for redressal of the grievance if the cause still subsists or to seek recall of this order within a reasonable time, say, within a period of three months. WPIL No. 4285 of 2020

1. Shri S.B.Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India is present.

2. None appears for the petitioner to press this writ petition, presumably because with passage of time the writ petition has lost its efficacy. If the cause still remains the petitioner may approach the concerned Authorities for redressal of the same or seek a recall of this order within reasonable time, say, within a period of three months.

3. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. WPIL No. 4365 of 2020

1. Heard Shri Anchal Srivastava holding brief of Shri Ravi Shankar Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.B.Pandey, learned Senior Counsel and Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Shri Devrishi Kumar, learned counsel for the Union of India.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to two affidavits filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 1 to 3. We have carefully gone through the affidavit.

3. After having gone through the affidavits we see no reason to proceed any further in this PIL, especially as, no rejoinder affidavit has been filed in response thereto. Various decisions have been taken from time to time as mentioned in the affidavit dated 06.03.2020 and another affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 3 dated 07.03.2020. If any cause or grievance still remains the petitioner may approach the concerned Ministry or Departments for redressal of the same or seek a recall of this order within a reasonable time, say, within a period of three months giving specific reason as to what more needs to done which is not being 10 WPIL No. 25691 of 2018 done by the opposite parties in respect of the subject matter.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. November 11, 2025 R.K.P. (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench