ORDER : D.N. Patel, J. 1. This writ petition has earlier been preferred by Sunil Kumar Pandey, who has now been substituted by Sushil Kumar Pandey, who is brother of the original petitioner, has mainly prayed that there are certain organizations like -Tritiya Prastuti Committee (T.P.C), Janamukti Parishad Committee (J.P.C), Jharkhand Jana Mukti Parishad (J.J.M.P), Jharkhand Liberation Tiger (J.L.T) and Green Army and they have developed nexus with Police Officers, Block Development Officers and Circle Officers and for investigation in this allegation by National Investigating Agency (NIA) or by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), this writ petition has been preferred as a Public Interest Litigation. 2. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case it appears that several allegations have been levelled against the Police Officers, Block Development Officers and Circle Officers of the State of Jharkhand, who are in close contact with the aforesaid organizations. 3. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has also submitted that in paragraph nos. 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, there are major allegations against the Police Officers, Block Development Officers and Circle Officers of the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner has also given the names of some persons with their mobile numbers in paragraph 10 with the allegation that these persons are extremists. Likewise, few names of Police Officers, Block Development Officers and Circle Officers of the State of Jharkhand have also been given in paragraphs 12 and 13 who are nexus with the aforesaid so-called extremists and therefore, investigation should be carried out by National Investigating Agency or by Central Bureau of Investigation in these allegations. 4. We have heard counsel appearing for the respondents, who has submitted that detailed counter affidavits have been filed. For the allegations levelled in this writ petition, preliminary inquiry has also been conducted by high ranking officer viz. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Palamau Range, who has given detailed report dated 22.2.2016, which is at annexure E to the counter affidavit filed on behalf the respondent no.2 dated 29.2.2016. It is submitted by counsel for the Respondent-State that mobile numbers given of these so-called persons whose names are entered in para-10 of the petition with an allegation that they are extremists, on verification it is found that they are not numbers of the respective person. It is submitted by counsel for the Respondent-State that mobile numbers given of these so-called persons whose names are entered in para-10 of the petition with an allegation that they are extremists, on verification it is found that they are not numbers of the respective person. Moreover, in the preliminary inquiry it is found that the allegations levelled are apparently baseless and devoid of any merit. There is no question of nexus of the police with the extremists. Several Police Officers have lost their lives in fight against the extremists. Stringent police action has also been initiated and perhaps this is reaction given by the extremists type of person – original petitioner. Several arms and ammunitions have been recovered by the police from the District of Palamau, which is extremely affected area by the extremists. Whenever police persons are taking action, such type of Public Interest Litigations are being field against them and therefore, this is not a Public Interest Litigation at all. Reports given by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Palamau Range, which is at Annexure-E to the aforesaid affidavit have been pointed out to this Court in detail and it is further submitted by the counsel for the respondents-State that several action have been initiated by the police against the extremists and, therefore, this petition has been preferred to bring down the moral of the Police Officers. Several new police pickets have also been started as stated in Annexure-II to the aforesaid report given by the Deputy Inspector General of Police. Likewise, several inquiries have been made on Call Detail Record of the mobile number, which have been given by the petitioner. Details of the call report is annexed with the aforesaid inquiry report and nothing is found objectionable. Certain number of mobile was kept as surveillance as stated in the said report. It is submitted by the counsel for the respondent-State that there are several cases registered by the original petitioner and there are several cases registered against him also under different sections of IPC like Sections 307, 120B, 379 and under the Arms Act. Several cases registered against the original petitioner under sections 384, 385, 386 of the IPC to be read with section 27 of the Arms Act. These are about extortion of the money etc. Several cases registered against the original petitioner under sections 384, 385, 386 of the IPC to be read with section 27 of the Arms Act. These are about extortion of the money etc. These details have been given in Annexure-IX to the report given by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Palamau Range which is at annexure-E to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.2 dated 29.2.2016. It is submitted by the counsel for the respondents-State that question has also been raised in the counter-affidavit that how the petitioner is getting mobile numbers of the extremists, unless he is involved in the extremists activity. Later on, petitioner has been murdered and the case has also been registered being Bishrampur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2015 which has been thoroughly investigated into and now charge-sheet has also been filed in the appropriate Court in the District of Palamau and concerned trial Court is sessied with the matter. Thus, this case may not be further continued with this Court and may kindly be disposed of. It is assured by the counsel for the respondents-State that whenever any allegation will come against the Police Officers or any other Officers of the State about the nexus of those Officers with the extremists, the same will be thoroughly inquired into. 5. Having heard the counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the original petitioner, who has now been substituted, has levelled several allegations, as stated hereinabove, in the memo of the petition that few persons named in paragraph 10 of the writ petition are extremists and in the subsequent paragraph, it has been mentioned that these extremists have got nexus with the Police Officers, Block Development Officers and Circle Officers. It appears that preliminary inquiry has also been conducted by the respondents-State authority by the high-ranking Police Officer e.g. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Palamau range because all the allegations are mainly about the activities of the District-Palamau. The said report is annexed at Annexure-E to the affidavit filed by respondent No.2 dated 29.02.2016. 6. Looking to the said affidavit of the detailed report, it appears that, (i) Several Police Officer have lost their lives in fight against the extremists ; (ii) Police has taken several actions against the organizations viz. The said report is annexed at Annexure-E to the affidavit filed by respondent No.2 dated 29.02.2016. 6. Looking to the said affidavit of the detailed report, it appears that, (i) Several Police Officer have lost their lives in fight against the extremists ; (ii) Police has taken several actions against the organizations viz. Tritiya Prastuti Committee (T.P.C), Janamukti Parishad Committee (J.P.C), Jharkhand Jana Mukti Parishad (J.J.M.P), Jharkhand Liberation Tiger (J.L.T) and Green Army. It appears that again these groups, FIRs have also been registered and the police has seized arms and ammunition. List is also annexed about the recovery of the arms and ammunitions which is at internal page number 27 of the affidavit filed by the respondent no.2 dated 29.2.2016. This list includes 9mm pistol, AK-47 rifle, live cartridges, country made pistols, rifles, 138 bore pistols, six round revolvers. Thus police has recovered several arms and ammunitions from the district of Palamau from the aforesaid groups. Some time when the police is working properly, then those who are connected with the extremists' activities, to reduce the moral of the police officers, preferred such type of cases. (iii) Now police pickets and police stations have been established to fight against such extremist groups. Details have also been given of the new police pickets/police stations and they are - (a) Nawajaipur police station; (b) Nawabazar police station; (c) Pipra police station; (d) Utari Road police station; (e) Langarkot picket (Hussainabad police station). These police pickets or the police stations have been newly established to control the activities of the so-called extremist groups. (iv) Manatu Action Plan has been formulated by the State for security and development at District-Palamau. The Public Welfare Committee has been started by the State and they are for maintaining the good law and order. Manatu Action Plan is also working effectively in the said region, as stated in the counter-affidavit. (v) Call Detail Records for the period before one year could not be obtained from the service provider as per the report given by the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Palamau vide Memo No. 15/TC. (vi) For the names of few persons, who are mentioned in paragraph10 of the writ petition, preliminary inquiry has been conducted and the mobile numbers do not belong to those persons as mentioned in paragraph-10 of the writ petition. Thus the averments and allegations made in paragraph-10 are false. (vi) For the names of few persons, who are mentioned in paragraph10 of the writ petition, preliminary inquiry has been conducted and the mobile numbers do not belong to those persons as mentioned in paragraph-10 of the writ petition. Thus the averments and allegations made in paragraph-10 are false. (vii) There are few allegations levelled against Anoop T. Mathew, who was, at the relevant time, the Superintendent of Police of Palamau, posted from the year 2011 to 2013. Preliminary inquiry establishes that there is no nexus of this Police Officer with the aforesaid organization. These are all personal allegation levelled against the earlier Superintendent of Police of District Palamau. Personal allegation can be levelled in a separate matter, at least other than Public Interest Litigation. (viii) No evidence has been found in support of the allegation of the nexus of the Police Officers with the members of the aforesaid organizations at District- Palamau. (ix) There are few allegations against one Police Officer P.K. Mishra. Preliminary inquiry has also been conducted against the said Officer and it is found that same was about his misbehaviour and nowhere it is connected with the extremist activities. (x) The Police Officers, who were posted at Palamau before May,2015, have also been inquired into and no nexus has been found out by these Police Officer with the extremists organizations nor there is any complaint filed by any of the citizens, except the original petitioner. (xi) There are few allegations against one retired officer Mr. B.D.Ram, who was the Director General of Police. It has been stated that he provided arms and ammunition to the extremists organizations. This allegation has been found to be baseless. On the contrary, stringent actions have been taken against these organizations. FIRs have been filed against the members of these organizations. Several Police Officers have lost their lives in fight against these extremists groups. Sizable number of arms and ammunitions have been recovered and therefore, this petition has been preferred. Hence, this is not a Public Interest Litigation at all. (xii) So far as murder of the original petitioner is concerned, there are several criminal litigations have been initiated against him also. Sizable number of arms and ammunitions have been recovered and therefore, this petition has been preferred. Hence, this is not a Public Interest Litigation at all. (xii) So far as murder of the original petitioner is concerned, there are several criminal litigations have been initiated against him also. He is also involved for the offence under sections 384, 385, 386 of the IPC to be read with section 27 of the Arms Act, later on he has been murdered and the case was registered as Bishrampur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2015 which was investigated into and ultimately charge sheet has also been filed before the competent trial court and the matter is pending before the competent trial court. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts, we see no reason further to monitor this case as enough and adequate action has been taken by the police, as stated herein above. There are several Police Officers who have lost their lives in fight against these extremists groups and sizable number of arms and ammunitions have been recovered by the police. 8. In view of the facts, there is no substance in the present Public Interest Litigation and the same is therefore, dismissed. 9. In view of the final order passed in this Public Interest Litigation, I.A. No. 758 of 2016 and I.A. No. 2350 of 2016 stand disposed of.