VIRENDRA SINGH PANWAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is reported that the petitioner is dead. Right to sue in a public interest litigation survives, even if the petitioner in the public interest litigation is dead, provided the litigation is bona fide. In such a case, the Court can proceed by appointing an Amicus Curiae.

(2.) As pleaded in Paragraph-1 of the writ petition, petitioner filed a writ petition on the same cause of action, but the same was dismissed on the ground that the allegation that unauthorized constructions are being made is not supported by any evidence. Present writ petition has been filed, where similar allegations have been levelled and those are supported by a First Information Report lodged by Nagar Nigam, Dehradun. It has been contended that despite the said First Information Report, illegal construction on the land belonging to Nagar Nigam is continuing. The gist of the First Information Report, which was lodged on 23rd May, 2013, is that, according to the information given on 20th May, 2013, the owner of Hotel Pacific Sri S.S. Bansal is making construction on a part of Khasra No. 15 belonging to Nagar Nigam.

(3.) One Shri Harshvardhan Mishra filed an affidavit on behalf of Nagar Nigam. In the said affidavit, amongst others, it was contended that no No Objection of Nagar Nigam was obtained with regard to the place in question, and that, on receiving information, Nagar Nigam stopped the construction work on the land of Nagar Nigam and a First Information Report was lodged.