S.S. CHAWLA Vs. CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed in public interest by an employee in accounts department of respondent No.2, who claims to be a whistle blower.

(2.) PETITIONER who appeared in person stated that the action of respondent No.2 in issuing gifts and/or cash coupons on the eve of 48th Annual General Meeting had resulted in a loss of Rs. 3 lacs to the public exchequer. He further alleged that respondent No.2 had transferred its "inconvenient" employees to a resource division where employees were paid salaries without any work being assigned to them. He submitted that salaries paid to such employees resulted in further loss to public exchequer.

(3.) IT is settled law that a person prompted by personal gain or any oblique consideration has no locus standi. In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (98) vs. Union of India, (2006) 5 SCC28 the Supreme Court reiterated the principle and even held that howsoever genuine a cause brought before a court by a public interest litigant may be, the court has to decline its examination at the behest of a person who, in fact, is not a public interest litigant and whose bona fides and credentials are in doubt; no trust can be placed by the court on a mala fide applicant in a public interest litigation.