N K PRASADA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein was respondent No. 8 in one of the public interest litigations being No. 6240 of 1997 which was disposed of along with another public interest litigation being No. 5717 of 1997 and Contempt Case No. 779 of 1997.

(2.) The appellant herein has not questioned the correctness or otherwise of the impugned judgment dated 6th July, 1998 passed by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the aforementioned matters but only is concerned with certain observations made therein as also imposition of a sum of Rs. 20,000/- by way of costs. These two public interest litigation were filed successively by one B. Kistaiah, said to be a former Member of Legislative Assembly and the Writ Petition No. 6240 of 1997 by Digumarthi Premchand, said to be a journalist. In the said purported public interest litigations alleged malfunctioning of the Commissioner of Central Excise resulting in loss of several crores of rupees as also purported dismantling of the Special Investigating Team headed by the appellant herein were in question.

(3.) The writ petitioners contended that the said Special Investigation Team was dismantled by the Commissioner-I, Central Excise and Customs, Hyderabad Commissionerate only with a view to help the dishonest traders and to prevent the cases relating to evasion of excise duty. The appellant was not initially a party therein but despite the same an order of transfer passed against him and others dated 10-3-1997 bearing Establishment Order (G.O.) No. 43/97 was questioned in the said writ petition. The cause of action for filing Writ Petition No. 5717 of 1997 was also said to be issuance of the said order of transfer dated 10-3-1997. A Division Bench of the High Court by an order dated 21-3-1997 directed the appellant (although thence he was not a party) not to hand over any record in any pending case which was or is under his investigation to M. V. S. Chowdary till 26-3-1997. The respondents were also purported to be relying on or on the basis of the additional affidavit directed by the High Court to file their counter-affidavits and produce the records relating to setting up of the Special Investigation Team and its disbanding. The writ petitioner, however, instructed his counsel to withdraw the writ petition stating :