SUBHAJIT SOM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who claims himself to be working as a clerk with an Advocate at Baruipur Court, has filed the present petition in public interest raising an issue that for procurement of LED street lights the instructions issued by the Government of West Bengal have been violated by the Chandernagore Municipal Corporation (for short 'the Corporation').

(2.) At the very outset, Mr. Kishore Dutta, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding locus of the petitioner to file the present petition in public interest. He submitted that it is a proxy litigation by some of the business house who may not have been successful in the tendering process. Credentials of the petitioner are not there to show that he is a public spirited person, who had earlier filed petition raising any issue of larger public interest. In the absence thereof, the present petition, filed for an oblique motive, deserves to be thrown out at the threshold. He referred to Rules framed by this Court regarding entertainment of the public interest litigation. His argument is that there is complete violation thereof and in terms of Rules 56 and 57 the present petition does not deserve to be entertained. In support reliance was placed upon judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal, 2010 3 SCC 402 .

(3.) He further argued that the petitioner claimed that he is working as a law clerk with an advocate in Baruipur Court. He is a resident of Garia East Boalia, District-South 24 Paraganas and the cause sought to be expounded is pertaining to Chandernagore. Hence, it cannot be justified on any ground that the petitioner will have any interest for the area where he is not living. However, no judgment specifying the territorial limits for a petitioner to raise an issue in public interest, has been cited.