Allahabad High Court

PRADEEP KUMAR TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided: 4 May 2026
Bench: ARUN BHANSALI KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA

Holding

A petition filed without demonstrable standing or genuine public‑interest purpose may be dismissed.

Summary

The petitioner, a self‑described social worker, filed a public‑interest litigation seeking enforcement of a Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board order dated 12‑09‑2023 directing the closure of a brick‑kiln in Village Narhani Turkwalia, Ballia. The petition alleged that the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate had not acted on the Board’s order, causing environmental harm to the local community. The court noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any personal interest or standing, providing only a vague claim of representing aggrieved villagers without substantiating his connection to the site. It further observed that the petitioner’s occupation as a social worker appeared to be used as a means to generate livelihood through filing petitions. Consequently, the court held that the petition could not be entertained as a genuine public‑interest action and dismissed it. The dismissal was pronounced by the Chief Justice and a Justice of the Allahabad High Court on 5 May 2026.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate standing of a petitioner filing a public‑interest litigation in environmental matters?
Can a petition be dismissed for lack of genuine public‑interest intent and alleged misuse of litigation for livelihood?

Subjects

Public Interest Litigation
Environmental Law
Standing
Pollution Control Board
Brick Kiln
Petition Dismissal

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
          PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1155 of 2026

Pradeep Kumar Tiwari
                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P. and 5 others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

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

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
                                                                                             WPIL No. 1155 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    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.



                                                                 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.)
                                    May 5, 2026
                                    Sandeep/Sazia




Digitally signed by :-
SANDEEP KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…