Jaspal Singh Hora v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (PIL) No. 17 of 2016 Jaspal Singh Hora, S/o Late Sardar Jagendra Singh Hora, Aged About 35 Years R/o Basant Kunj Near Santoshi Mandir, Shyam Nagar, Ravigram, Tehsil & District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Sports And Youth Welfare Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur Chhattisgarh Pin 492002

2. Commissioner, Sports And Youth Welfare Chhattisgarh, International Hockey Stadium, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pin 492002

3. M/s Gazal Caterers Pvt. Ltd., G 23, D.L.F. Centre Point Bata More, Faridabad (Haryana) ------Respondents For Petitioner:

Shri Vaibhav P. Shukla, Advocate.

For Respondent/State:

Shri Additional Advocate General.

Hon'ble The Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Judgment on Board Per Navin Sinha, Chief Justice 17/02/2016 1.

The present Writ Application has been filed in the form of a Public Interest Litigation alleging mismanagement and waste of public funds during 20th National Youth Festival held between 12th-16th, January, 2016 at Raipur. 2.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that there was gross mismanagement leading to wastage of public funds. Sub-standard food was supplied to the participants. It was a five day event in which approximately, 5,000 people participated with a 10 crore budget. The proposal for engaging food service provider for providing food and catering services to the participants in the clause dealing with the other terms and conditions stipulated that poor service or supply of sub-standard food would warrant

imposition of penalty and that food was required to be prepared in hygienic conditions to be monitored by designated officials. The specified number of counters were also not provided. Relying on the notice inviting request for proposal with regard to the 12th South Asian Games proposed to be held at Guwahati and other places, it was submitted that payments should have been staggered as provided in Clause-28 of the same and inquiry is required to be conducted, responsibility to be fixed with regard to those who have indulged in squandering of public funds.

3.

Reliance was further placed on a news item in the Hindi daily "Haribhoomi" dated 14.1.2016 that adequate water supply was not arranged and the "sambar" served was cold. There were other deficiencies with regard to absence of adequate hot water for bathing. Complaints had been filed before the authorities by others.

4.

We have applied our mind to the present application filed in the form of a Public Interest Litigation. We put a question to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that what does the Petitioner do for living. We were told that he is a service provider for public events. The Writ Petition states that he has no personal interest in the matter acknowledging that he was engaged in the filed of event management. No specific statement has been made in the pleading with regard to the nature of business that he carries on and how he was not at all concerned professionally with the arrangements and facilities at the games much less does he state that he was not a bidder or a participant for any works invited for by the Government.

5.

If public money is squandered callously and negligently in violation of prescribed rules and procedures, a public spirited citizen undoubtedly has the right to approach the Court. Public Interest Litigation has now emerged as a strong tool even though it was originally intended to come to the aid of the

poor and marginalized who are unable to approach the Court for relief. But a Public Interest Litigation cannot be allowed to be converted into a Publicity Interest Litigation. A person approaching a Court of law in a Public Interest Litigation has a bounden duty to first collect all facts and figures in support of the allegations with regard to squandering of public money and then place it before the Court on basis of quantifiable data along with allegations with regard to procedures and rules that may have been violated. 6.

The foundation of the present Writ Petition is only a newspaper item which is but hearsay evidence unless the author of the news item is first examined only after which its authenticity can be established. We fail to understand how the assertions in a news paper report are claimed by the Petitioner in his affidavit to be true to its knowledge. There is absolutely no pleading with regard to on what heads how much money has been spent and in what manner the Petitioner alleges that it was mismanagement. No figures have been provided to even prima facie demonstrate that how the budget under any heads may have been exorbitant if the Petitioner so opines. 7.

It would be a travesty of justice if the time of this Court is to be consumed in examination of such frivolous grievances at the behest of the person like the present Petitioner that warm water was not available for bathing, drinking water supply may have been delayed and that the "sambar" was cold".

8.

This Writ Application filed in the form of Public Interest Litigation is absolutely frivolous in nature and is dismissed with exemplary cost of Rs.50,000/- to be recovered from the Petitioner as arrears of Land Revenue under Section 147 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code by the competent authority.

9.

At this stage, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner requests that he may

be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition.

10.

We recall the earlier part of the order and dismiss the Writ Petition as withdrawn.

Sd/- Sd/- (Navin Sinha) (P. Sam Koshy) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE Priya