C.L. DEVGUN Vs. NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), is by a former employee of the New Delhi Municipal Council (,,NDMC) and seeks a mandamus to the NDMC to "withdraw the facilities being provided to the non - official members" and for a declaration of "all the facilities currently being enjoyed by the non -official members of NDMC as illegal."

(2.) A preliminary objection to the maintainability of the PIL has been raised by Mr.Vikas Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) on behalf of the Union of India. According to him, the petition is by a former employee of the NDMC who may be disgruntled and therefore this raises doubts about his bonafides. He accordingly prays for in limine dismissal of the PIL. In support of this contention Mr.Singh referred to the decisions of the Supreme Court in Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee v. C.K. Rajan (2003) 7 SCC 546 and Common Cause v. Union of India (2008) 5 SCC 511. However, Mr.Parag Tripathi, learned ASG appearing for the NDMC did not raise any such objection to the maintainability of this petition. He went so far as to say that any concerned citizen had a right to know whether the monies spent by a statutory authority like the NDMC were within the scope of its statutory powers and had been deployed for achieving the objects of the concerned statute.

(3.) This petition concerns the provision of facilities to non -official members of the NDMC, which is a municipal body whose functioning is governed by a statute of Parliament. It seeks accountability for the expenditure incurred by the NDMC for such purpose. The expenditure incurred by a statutory authority of monies entrusted to it, which is contributed to by the public at large, is certainly expected to be in conformity with and for achieving the objects of the statute. A demand for transparency and accountability in the functioning of a statutory body like the NDMC cannot be termed as "frivolous" or "vexatious" or as serving some "personal interest". The present PIL therefore does not fall within the ,,prohibited illustrative categories of cases noted in the decisions cited by Mr.Vikas Singh. The issue raised in this PIL is of substantial public importance. The fact that the petitioner happens to be a former employee of the NDMC cannot by itself disentitle him from agitating such an issue. The preliminary objection to the maintainability of this petition as a PIL is accordingly overruled.