ASHISH PANJIYARA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submitted that following are the prayers made in the memo of the petition:

(2.) IT is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that this writ petition has been filed because height of the road in question has increased due to reconstruction. Petitioner No. 1 is a part time lecturer. Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are Advocates and this writ petition has been filed in the interest of public at large with respect to construction of a public road.

(3.) COUNSEL for the State submitted that a detailed counter -affidavit has been filed and relying upon paragraphs 13 and 19 of the counter -affidavit filed by the respondent State, the counsel submitted that for construction of the road in question a Detailed Project Report, which is a road map for the construction activities, has been prepared and the road in question has been constructed as per the approved Detailed Project Report and that this public interest litigation may not be entertained at this stage.