Judgment Heard Mr. Akshya Ku. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioners. The present petition has been laid as a Public Interest Litigation by a group of permanent residents of village Burja in the district of Koraput. They seek judicial intervention of this Court being aggrieved by the activities of some public officials of the K.B.K. districts involving misappropriation of government funds in collusion with some contractors, politicians etc. They have stated that though viewing the outrage of the villagers of the KBK districts, one Pravakar Das, Assistant Engineer, (P.H.), ITDA, Koraput was sought to be transferred by order dated 20.06.2011, the said move was tried to be scuttled at the intervention of higher officials. Referring to news items leveling similar imputations, the petitioners have stated that though a representation, highlighting such notorious activities, had been made to the Chief Administrator, KBK, Bhubaneswar (O.P. No.5) on 15.12.2011, no action was taken. Being exasperated, they have thus turned to this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the above facts has urged this Court to intervene in the matter. A plain reading of the averments made in the writ petition reveals that the same is lacking in material facts and particulars. The allegations made are sweeping and omnibus. As the petition has been laid to initiate a PIL, it is expected that the same be filed as per the mandate of the Orissa High Court Public Interest Litigation Rules, 2010, giving adequate facts with supporting documents together with essential information and data founded on research so as to enable this Court to take cognizance of the imputations and to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Not only, to reiterate, the petition lacks in the essential information and factual details, even the representation which is said to have been submitted by the petitioners is of 15.12.2011 i.e. almost three years have passed in between. On an overall consideration of these aspects, we are thus not inclined to interfere. The petition is thus closed with the observation that if so advised, the petitioners may submit an appropriate representation divulging the details before the concerned authority, who, on the same, would take a decision in accordance with law after affording them an opportunity of hearing, if it deemed fit and proper. Ordered accordingly. The petition stands disposed.