BADRI PRASAD VERMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petitioner namely Badri Prasad Verma s/o Dhanu Ram Verma claiming to be apro bono public character, has filed this writ petition to espouse the public cause. It is complained that though the 7th respondent herein has been granted permission to open rural retail outlet/petrol pump at Pallari-Arang Road, but, in connivance with the officers of the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, the 3rd respondent herein has changed the site and started construction to open the outlet at National Highway No. 9, Raipur Road. So alleging, the petitioner has sought for writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order appointing the 7th respondent as dealer for retail outlet/petrol pump and for a direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to open the retail outlet/petrol pump at Pallari-Arang Road in terms of the advertisement annexed to the writ petition as Annexure P-1. This Court having entertained the writ petition on 3-7-2006, directed notice rule nisi. On service of notice, returns are filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 3, 6 and 7. In the return filed by respondent No. 3 Corporation, it is stated that the 3rd respondent had called for applications to grant outlet at Pallari-Arang Road. In Paras 3 and 4 of the return of the 3rd respondent, it is stated thus: (3) The respondent No. 3 has advertised and granted retail outlet at Pallari. Pallari is a municipality having population of approximate 10,000 and it is rural market for the purpose of petrol and diesel and keeping in view the need of residents of Pallari Nagary Panchayat area, it was decided to have a retail outlet at Pallari. The advertisement was for location Pallari (Arang Road). The idea was to put up RO in the rural market of Pallari which also covers the stretch from Gram Pallari to Arang Road. As per this, all the 09 applicants who came for interview, were considered by the independent Selection Committee and marks were duly awarded to each applicant without discrimination by the independent Selection Committee as per guideline who had shown availability of land at Pallari and from Pallari to Arang Road. During interview, the applicant, Miss Anuradha Khute had shown land papers (Sale Deed of 2002) of the subject site at Gram Pallari, Kh No. 832 Part, jointly owned by her and her brother, for which marks were given to her accordingly. The construction of the Petrol pump is taking place on this selected site. Thus, it is incorrect to state that the location has been changed as per the convenience of the applicant. Besides, the subject site is not on National Highway as incorrectly mentioned in the petition. (4) It is not Pallari-Arang Road. The petitioner is unnecessarily stressing on the location as Pallari-Arang Road. The object behind establishment of the petrol pump/retail outlet is to cater the needs of the residents of the Village Pallari which is the Nagar Panchayat area and which is being constructed by the respondent No. 7 within the municipal limits of Pallari. The some part of Arang Road is also within the municipal limits of Nagar Panchayat Pallari. The selection of the site at Pallari is strictly as per advertisement and there is no deviation from the advertisement issued by the respondent No. 3. The present location will even otherwise be very approachable for the residents of Pallari. The petitioner has incorrectly mentioned that the subject site is on the National Highway, it is not on National Highway but it is within the municipal limits of Pallari. Therefore the petitioner's contention that it is being established in the National Highway No. 9 is incorrect and contrary to the record.

(2.) In Para 3.E of the return of the 7th respondent, it is stated thus:

(3.) It is quite often said and reiterated by the Courts, particularly in recent times, that the menace of dishonest and mischievous Public Interest Litigations should be curbed at the threshold. Public Interest Litigation as a social mechanism to address the issues of public justice is a noble technique which has to be invoked and entertained with circumspection and accountability. Public Interest Litigation as a technique should not be availed of or misused by the busy bodies and unscrupulous elements in the garb of PIL to serve reliefs to kith and kin of the mover of the application. Furthermore, it needs to be noticed that it is not as if each and every violation and irregularity in the State action could be subject matter of Public Interest Litigation. A substantive injury to the public interest involving large number of people could alone be subject matter of Public Interest Litigation.