National Green Tribunal
Rakhi Bala Singare vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 January, 2026
Item No.03
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL
(Through Video Conferencing)
Original Application No.09/2026(CZ)
Rakhi Bala Singare Applicant(s)
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of Hearing: 23.01.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. SUDHIR KUMAR CHATURVEDI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant (s): Ms. Rakhi Bala Singare, in person
ORDER
1. Ms. Rakhi Bala Singare, resident of Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, personally appeared and argued the matter at length with the rules and law within her capacity, touching the environmental matters and highlighting the Champak Lake situated in the Panchmarhi, Narmadapuram, M.P., having an area of 43.400 hectares and arguments confined to be wetland as per the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that any water body having an area of 2.25 hectares is recorded as wetland.
2. It is further submitted that on 15.10.2013, the permission for establishment of adventurous sports activities over the Champak Lake was granted to the Satpura Adventure Sports Club, Panchmarhi, Hoshangabad which continues to exists till date after subsequent renewals and also the permission for establishment of zipline was granted to Respondent No.7 on 01.09.2015 which continues to exists till date. It is stated that due to the permission granted by these authorities, a number of adventurous sports activities which includes 1 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
but not limited to zip line, parasailing etc which attracts tourism and the activities, are in continuance till date and that many of the small kiosk centres and restaurant outlets temporary structures like camping tents are built near to the champak lake. Due to this, people do visit these centres and more often harm is caused to the lake due to the human activities near the Lake.
3. It is further argued that the Respondent No.6 i.e. District Archaeological, Tourism and Culture Council Narmadapuram, is involved in or permitting tourism related cultural or commercial activities in and around Champak Lake, Panchmarhi, which are adversely affecting the ecology of the said waterbody and are impermissible under the Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, and are violative of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986. Public Trust Doctrine as held in M.C Mehta vs. Kamal Nath, 1997, the District Archaeological, Tourism and Culture Council being the trustee of the Champak Lake.
4. A copy of the order dated 30.12.2025 issued by the Department of Special Area Development Authority (SADA) has been filed as Annexure-1, showing the area to be 43.400 hectares and recorded as 'Lake (Jheel)'.
5. The relevant rules with regard to the 'Wetland' are enumerated as follows:-
"............x...............x...........x.............x.................. Legal Provisions for the conservation and managements of the wetlands: -
Being a signatory of Ramsar convention, 1971, India has come up with the rules to preserve and regulate the wetland, so as to maintain their ecological characteristics. Subsequently, the MOEF&CC, New Delhi notified the Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 dated 26.09.2017 in official Gazette.2
O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
▪ As per the rule no. 4(2)(vi) of the Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 "any construction of a permanent nature except for boat jetties within fifty meters from the mean high flood level observed in the past ten years calculated from the date of commencement of these rules"
▪ Also, as per the order of the Hon'ble SC in the case no. WP (civil) No. 230/2001 M.K. Balakrishnan vs Union of India dated 08.03.2022 and office memorandum issued by the GOI, all the wetlands situated within the respective district boundaries having area (> 2.25 hectare) shall be protected under rule no. 4 of the Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017. ▪ In light of the aforementioned, it is proposed that wetlands larger than 2.25 hectares be conserved in accordance with Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, Rule No.
4. Thus, the Dal Sagar Lake, which has a surface area of about 18 hectares, shall likewise be protected by the same regulation. Copy of wetland rules and office memorandum issued on date 08.03.2022 by MOEF&CC is enclosed."
6. It is of utmost importance for meeting the rising demand for water augmentation, improving the health of waterbodies as they provide various ecosystem services that are required to manage microclimate, biodiversity and nutrient cycling. Many cities are working towards conservation of waterbodies like the steps initiated in the capital city of Delhi for instance. In turning Delhi into a city of lakes, rejuvenation of 201 waterbodies has been finalised. Of these, the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) plans to revive 155 bodies while the Flood and Irrigation Department will revive 46. DJB claims that the aim is to achieve biological oxygen demand or BOD to 10ppm and total suspended solids to 10mg/l. Also the establishment of the Wetlands Authority by the Delhi government is a welcome step towards notifying and conserving natural waterbodies.
In order to achieve the goal of revival of waterbodies, it is important to understand that one solution may not fit all the waterbodies.
Depending on the purpose, ecological services, livelihood and socio-
3O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
cultural practices, the approach will vary from one waterbody to another. However, the issues with regard to lack of data and action plans, encroachments, interrupted water flow from the catchment, siltation, violations of laws, solid waste deposit and polluted water, involvement of too many agencies, etc. have to be taken into consideration.
7. Action needs to be taken towards:
1. Attaining sustainability. Thus, emphasis on long term goals, operation and maintenance should be included along with the allocation of budget.
2. Success of the lakes should be tested on all three fronts namely economic, environmental and social. Many studies point that a deliberate effort has to be made on the social front for which better publicity of the environmental benefits of the project and enhancing environmental awareness, especially among the local community is required.
3. Encouraging local people to collaborate with other stakeholders to successfully utilise resources and ensure the protection and conservation of waterbodies.
4. Traditionally, water was seen as a responsibility of citizens and the community collectively took the responsibility of not only building but also of maintaining the water bodies. This needs to be brought back into the system.
5. Thus, an integrated approach taking into account the long-term sustainability, starting from the planning stage were looking at every waterbody along with its catchment, is required."
8. It is stated that untreated/sewage water is being discharged continuously in the water body. The rule does not provide such activities. The legislature has enacted the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 to provide for the prevention and control of water pollution and the maintaining or restoring of water and for carrying out the aforesaid purpose the Board has been constituted. The problem of pollution of rivers, water bodies and streams has assumed considerable importance and urgency in recent years as a result of the 4 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
growth of industries and the increasing tendency to urbanization. It is therefore essential to ensure that the domestic and industrial effluents are not allowed to be discharged into the water course without adequate treatment as such discharges could render the water unsuitable either source of drinking water as well as for supporting fish life and for use in irrigation. Pollution of rivers, water bodies and streams also cause increasing damage to the country's economy. The relevant sections of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 are as follows:-
"Section 2 (e)-
Pollution which means such contamination of water or such alteration of the physical, chemical or biological properties of water or such discharge of any sewage or trade effluent or of any other liquid, gaseous or solid substance into water (whether directly or indirectly) as may, or is likely to, create a nuisance or render such water harmful or injurious to public health or safety, or to domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural or other legitimate uses, or to the life and health of animals or plants or of aquatic organisms.
Section 17 - That the State Board shall plan a comprehensive programme for the prevention, control or abatement of pollution of streams and wells in the State and to secure the execution thereof; to advise the State Government on any matter concerning the prevention, control or abatement of water pollution; to evolve methods of utilisation of sewage and suitable trade effluents in agriculture; to lay down standards of treatment of sewage and trade effluents to be discharged into any particular stream taking into account the minimum fair weather dilution available in that stream (1(l)(i) take necessary action for the prevention, control or abatement of discharge of waste into streams or wells or water bodies.
Section 24 -
Provides prohibition on use of stream or well for disposal of polluting matter, etc. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, -
(a) no person shall knowingly cause or permit any poisonous, noxious or polluting matter determined in accordance with such 5 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
standards as may be laid down by the State Board to enter (whether directly or indirectly) into any 1 [stream or well or sewer or on land]; or
(b) no person shall knowingly cause or permit to enter into any stream any other matter which may tend, either directly or in combination with similar matters, to impede the proper flow of the water of the stream in a manner leading or likely to lead to a substantial aggravation of pollution due to other causes or of its consequences.
(2) (c) putting into a stream any sand or gravel or other natural deposit which has flowed from or been deposited by the current of such stream.
Provides restrictions on new outlets and new discharges. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, no person shall, without the previous consent of the State Board,--
(a) establish or take any steps to establish any industry, operation or process, or any treatment and disposal system or an extension or addition thereto, which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into a stream or well or sewer or on land (such discharge being hereafter in this section referred to as discharge of sewage); or
(b) bring into use any new or altered outletsfor the discharge of sewage; or
(c) begin to make any new discharge of sewage; Provided that a person in the process of taking any steps to establish any industry, operation or process immediately before the commencement of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1988, for which no consent was necessary prior to such commencement, may continue to do so for a period of three months from such commencement or, if he has made an application for such consent, within the said period of three months, till the disposal of such application."
Power of Board to make application to courts for restraining apprehended pollution of water in streams or wells
1) Where it is apprehended by a Board that the water in any stream or well is likely to be polluted by reason of the disposal or likely disposal of any matter in such stream or well or in any sewer or on any land, or otherwise, the Board may make an application to a 6 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
court, not inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class, for restraining the person who is likely to cause such pollution from so causing.
2) On receipt of an application under sub-section (1) the court may make such order as it deems fit.
3) Where under sub-section (2) the court makes an order restraining any person from polluting the water in any stream or well, it may in that order-
(i) direct the person who is likely to cause or has caused the pollution of the water in the stream or well, to desist from taking such action as is likely to cause pollution or, as the case may be, to remove from such stream or well, such matter, and
(ii) authorise the Board, if the direction under clause
(i) (being a direction for the removal of any matter from such stream or well) is not complied with by the person to whom such direction is issued, to undertake the removal and disposal of the matter in such manner as may be specified by the court.
4) direct the person who is likely to cause or has caused the pollution of the water in the stream or well, to desist from taking such action as is likely to cause pollution or, as the case may be, to remove from such stream or well, such matter, and i. authorise the Board, if the direction under clause (i) (being a direction for the removal of any matter from such stream or well) is not complied with by the person to whom such direction is issued, to undertake the removal and disposal of the matter in such manner as may be specified by the court.
33 A. Power to give directions Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, but subject to the provisions of this Act, and to any directions that the Central Government may give in this behalf, a Board may, in the exercise of its powers and performance of its functions under this Act, issue any directions in writing to any person, officer or authority, and such person, officer or authority shall be bound to comply with such directions.
Explanation: For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that the power to issue directions under this section includes the power to direct- (a) the closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or (b) the storage or regulation of supply of electricity, water or any other service.
7O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Failure to comply with directions under Sub-Section (2) or Sub- Section (3) of Section 20, or order issued under Clause (c) of Sub-Section (1) of 32 or directions issued under Sub-Section (2) of Section 33 of Section 33A.
1.Whoever fails to comply with any direction given under sub- section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 20 within such time as may be specified in the direction shall, or conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both and in case the failure continues, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which such failure continues after the conviction for the first such failure.
2.Whoever fails to comply with any order issued under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 32 or any direction issued by a court under sub-section (2) of section 33 or any direction issued under section 33A shall, in respect of each such failure and on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year and six months but which may extend to six years and with fine, and case the failure continues, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which such failure continues after the conviction for the first such failure.
3.If the failure referred to in sub-section (2) continues beyond a period of one year after the date of conviction, the offender shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to seven years and with fine.
Penalty for certain acts.
(1) Whoever -
a) destroys, pulls down, removes, injures or defaces any pillar, post or stake fixed in the ground or any notice or other matter put up, inscribed or placed, by or under the authority of the Board, or
(b) obstructs any person acting under the orders or directions of the Board from exercising his powers and performing his functions under this Act, or
(c) damages any works or property belonging to the Board, or
(d) fails to furnish to any officer or other employee of the Board any information required by him for the purpose of this Act, or 8 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
(e) fails to intimate the occurrence of an accident or other unforeseen act or even under section 31 to the Board and other authorities or agencies as required by that section, or
(f) in giving any information which he is required to give under this Act, knowingly or willfully makes a statement which is false in any material particular, or (g) for the purpose of obtaining any consent under section 25 or section 26, knowingly or willfully makes a statement which is false in any material particular shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to 1 [ten thousand rupees] or with both.
(2) Where for the grant of a consent in pursuance of the provisions of section 25 or section 26 the use of a meter or gauge or other measure or monitoring device is required and such device is used for the purposes of those provision, any person who knowingly or willfully alters or interferes with that device so as to prevent it from monitoring or measuring correctly shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to 1 [ten thousand rupees] or with both.
Penalty for contravention of provisions of Section 24. Whoever contravenes the provisions of section 24 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 1 [one year and six months] but which may extend to six years and with fine.
Penalty for contravention of Section 25 or Section 26. Whoever contravenes the provision of section 25 or section 26 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 1 [one year and six months] but which may extend to six years and with fine.
Section 45 - Enhanced Penalty after previous conviction. If any person who has been convicted of any offence under section 24 or 25 or section 26 is again found guilty of an offence involving a contravention of the same provision, he shall, on the second and on every subsequent conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 2 [two years] but which may extend to seven years and with fine: Provided that for the purpose of this section no cognizance shall be taken of any conviction made more 9 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
than two years before the commission of the offence which is being punished.
Section 45A Penalty for contravention of certain provisions of the Act.
3. [Whoever contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or fails to comply with any order or direction given under this Act, for which no penalty has been elsewhere provided in this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both and in the case of a continuing contravention or failure, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which such contravention or failure continues after conviction for the first such contravention or failure.
Section 48 - Provides that offences by government departments.
Where an offence under this Act has been committed by any Department of Government, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
The Provision of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any enactment other than this Act.
Thus, it is a statutory duty of the State Pollution Control Board to check the abatement of the water pollution and also advice the authorities concerned and failure to comply the statutory duty is defiance of the act and necessary action with calculation and recovery of environmental compensation is the pious duty of the Pollution Control Board. We hope and trust that the State Pollution Control Board will not hesitate to proceed according to law and try to fulfill the purpose of the act."
9. It is relevant to quote sections of Wetlands (Conservation & Management) Rules, 2017, as follows:-
"Section 2 (g) "wetland" means an area of marsh, fen, peatland or water; whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water 10 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters, but does not include river channels, paddy fields, human-made water bodies/tanks specifically constructed for drinking water purposes and structures specifically constructed for aquaculture, salt production, recreation and irrigation purposes.
Section 4 Restrictions of activities in wetlands.--
1) The wetlands shall be conserved and managed in accordance with the principle of 'wise use' as determined by the Wetlands Authority.
2) The following activities shall be prohibited within the wetlands, namely,-
(i) conversion for non-wetland uses including encroachment of any kind;
(ii) setting up of any industry and expansion of existing industries;
(iii) manufacture or handling or storage or disposal of construction and demolition waste covered under the Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules, 2016;
hazardous substances covered under the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989 or the Rules for Manufacture, Use, Import, Export and Storage of Hazardous Micro- organisms Genetically engineered organisms or cells, 1989 or the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008; electronic waste covered under the E-Waste (Management) Rules, 2016;
(iv) solid waste dumping;
(v) discharge of untreated wastes and effluents from industries, cities, towns, villages and other human settlements;
(vi) any construction of a permanent nature except for boat jetties within fifty metres from the mean high flood level observed in the past ten years calculated from the date of commencement of these rules; and,
(vii) poaching.
Provided that the Central Government may consider proposals from the State Government or Union Territory Administration for omitting any of the activities on the recommendation of the Authority."
ii. It has further been provided in the Section 5 of the Wetlands Rules directing the State Government to prepare a list of all the 11 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
wetlands of the State within three months from the date of publication of these rules and to prepare a list of wetlands to be notified, within six months from the date of publication of these rules taking into cognizance any existing list of wetlands prepared/notified under other relevant State Acts and recommend identified wetlands, based on their Brief Documents, for regulation under these rules. Further, there is a provision to prepare a comprehensive digital inventory of all wetlands within a period of one year from the date of publication of these rules and upload the same on a dedicated web portal to be developed by the Central Government for the said purpose, the inventory to be updated every ten years. It has further been provided that the State has to develop a comprehensive list of activities to be regulated and permitted within the notified wetlands and their zone of influence. In cases wherein lands within boundary of notified wetlands or wetlands complex have private tenancy rights, recommend mechanisms for maintenance of ecological character through promotional activities.
Section 7 of the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 provides as follows:-
"Delegation of powers and functions to the State Governments and Union Territory Administrations.--
(1) The concerned Department of the State Government or Union Territory Administration shall, within a period of one year from the date of publication of these rules, prepare a Brief Document for each of the wetland identified for notification, providing:--
(a) demarcation of wetland boundary supported by accurate digital maps with coordinates and validated by ground truthing;
(b) demarcation of its zone of influence and land use and land cover thereof indicated in a digital map; (c) ecological character description;
(3) The State Government or Union Territory Administration shall, after considering the objections, if any, from the concerned and affected persons, notify the wetlands in the Official Gazette, within a period not exceeding 240 days from the date of recommendation by the Authority".
Accordingly, it is mandatory duty of the State Authorities to demarcate and publish the list of wetlands within the period as 12 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
prescribed above and if it is not done it is violation of rules and necessary disciplinary action should be taken against the authority concerned. We are of the view that the rules could have been followed and if not done the respondents are directed to expedite it, execute it and to publish in public domain.
iii. When the law protector becomes the law violators, how law will be protected. The basic principle of rule of law is to follow rule/ law and not to break or violate it. For the negligence of those to whom public duties have been entrusted can never be allowed to cause public mischief. Public servants if committing wrong in discharge of statutory functions and later on if it was found not be in accordance with law within the knowledge of the officer concerned then it cannot be said to be the work and duty within the definition of State Act.
iv. The action and construction is not only disregard to the law but it is negation of the authority of the State by the public official doing the act and expending the budget in accordance with their wishes. An action specifically punitive action does lie for doing what the legislature has authorized if it is done negligently carelessly and in violation of the law. Under our Constitution sovereignty vests in the people. Every limb of the constitutional machinery is obliged to be people oriented. No functionary in exercise of statutory power can claim immunity, except to the extent protected by the statute itself. Public authorities acting in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions oppressively are accountable for their behaviour before authorities created under the statute like the commission or the courts entrusted with responsibility of maintaining the rule of law. Each hierarchy in the Act is empowered to entertain a complaint by the consumer for value of the goods or services and compensation. Any act by any officer in violation of the rules is abuse of power, deliberate maladministration, and perhaps also other unlawful acts causing injury. The servants of the government are also the servants of the people and the use of their power must always be subordinate to their duty of service. A public functionary if he acts maliciously or oppressively and the exercise of power results in harassment and agony then it is not an exercise of power but its abuse. No law provides protection against it. He who is responsible for it must suffer it. Compensation or damage as explained earlier may arise even when the officer discharges his duty mala-fidely and not in accordance with the guidelines, when it arises due to arbitrary or capricious behaviour then it loses its individual character and 13 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
assumes social significance. Harassment of a common man by public authorities is socially abhorring and legally impermissible. It may harm him personally but the injury to society is far more grievous. Crime and corruption thrive and prosper in the society due to lack of public resistance. Nothing is more damaging than the feeling of helplessness. An ordinary citizen instead of complaining and fighting succumbs to the pressure of undesirable functioning in offices instead of standing against it. Therefore the award of compensation for harassment by public authorities not only compensates the individual, satisfies him personally but helps in curing social evil. It may result in improving the work culture and help in changing the outlook.
v. Absence of arbitrary power is the first essential of the rule of law upon which our whole constitutional system is based. In a system governed by rule of law, discretion, when conferred upon executive authorities, must be confined within clearly defined limits. The Rule of Law means that the decisions should be made by the application of known principles and rules, such decisions should be predictable and the citizens should know where he is. If decision is taken without any principle or without any rule, it is unpredictable and such decision is the anti-thesis of a decision taken in accordance with the Rule of Law. Even where there is no ministerial duty as above, and even where no recognised tort such as trespass, nuisance, or negligence is committed, public authorities or officers may be liable in damages for malicious, deliberate or injurious wrong-doing. There is thus a tort which has been called misfeasance in public office, and which includes malicious abuse of power, deliberate maladministration, and perhaps also other unlawful acts causing injury."
10. The Applicant in person has further argued that there are repeated discharge of untreated water and throwing of garbage in the Lake adversely affecting the environment and damage to the said Lake.
11. A substantial issue of environmental has been raised.
12. Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable within four weeks.
13. The Applicant is directed to take necessary steps for service to the Respondent by both ways and also on available email.
14O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
14. The Respondents are directed to submit the reply within four weeks through E-filing portal, preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
15. We also deem it just and proper to call a report on the matter in issue, in present application, from a Joint Committee consisting of:
(i) One Representative from the Principal Secretary Environment, Govt. of M.P.,
(ii) One Representative from the Member Secretary, State Wetlands Authority, Govt. of M.P.,
(iii) One Representative from the Divisional Forest Officer, Narmadapuram,
(iv) One Representative from the Member Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board, (M.P.)
16. The Committee is directed to visit the site and submit the factual and action taken report within four weeks. The State PCB will be the Nodal Agency for coordination and logistic support. It is desirable that at the time of visit, the representative of the State PCB may inform the Applicant on available e-mail or phone number to remain present and put the matter as narrated in the present application.
17. Applicant is further directed to supply the required documents and copy of the application to the Committee and the Respondents within a week and after compliance of service, the Applicant has to submit an affidavit that notices and copy of the application have been served upon the Committee and Respondents.
18. The report in the matter be filed by the Committee by email at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
15O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
List it on 27th March, 2026.
Sheo Kumar Singh, JM Sudhir Kumar Chaturvedi, EM 23rd January, 2026, Original Application No.09/2026(CZ) AK 16 O.A. No.09/2026(CZ) Rakhi Bala Singare Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.