Petition dismissed due to lack of locus standi and potential misuse of legal process for personal vendetta
In a recent judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Jabalpur, comprising the bench of Justices Vivek Rusia and Pradeep Mittal, dismissed a writ petition filed by Virendra Patil. The petition alleged widespread illegalities and corruption in the mining sector, specifically highlighting the involvement of certain firms and government officials in unlawful sand mining activities.
The petitioner, represented by Advocate Abhinesh Soni, sought multiple directives from the court. These included initiating proceedings for recovery of dues from certain respondents, setting up an inquiry into the issuance of royalty slips by firms allegedly blacklisted, and investigating unauthorized mining activities beyond designated areas and below riverbed levels.
However, the court found that Patil failed to establish his locus standi, as the relief sought did not pertain to his personal rights. It was noted that the petitioner had previously submitted a representation and approached the court under Writ Petition No. 8244/2025 with similar allegations. The court observed that competent statutory authorities are in place to address such allegations of corruption and illegal mining, as the Mining Act and Rules provide a comprehensive framework for controlling illegal activities through penalties, seizure of vehicles, and prosecution of offenders.
Justice Rusia, delivering the order, emphasized that the issues raised in the petition could not be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by someone who is essentially a stranger to the dispute. The court concluded that the petition appeared to be an attempt to misuse the legal process, possibly to target an individual named Mr. Guldeep Gupta or as part of a sponsored litigation effort.
The Deputy Advocate General, Shri Abhijeet Awasthi, represented the State of Madhya Pradesh, arguing that the petition lacked merit and was an inappropriate use of judicial resources.
The court's decision underscores the importance of establishing a direct personal stake in the relief sought when approaching the judiciary, reiterating that the legal system cannot be used as a tool for settling personal scores or pursuing vendettas.
Bottom Line:
Writ petition dismissed as petitioner failed to disclose locus standi and appears to misuse the process of law for personal vendetta or sponsored litigation.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India
