WALLAMPHANG ROY Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is being preferred in the nature of Public Interest Litigation (for short "PIL") assailing the execution of the agreements dated 7.9.01 and 23.4.02 by the State of Meghalaya, the State Respondents with M/s M.S. Associates, Respondent No. 5 appointing Respondent No. 5 as Distributor for 'Meghalaya State Computerised On-line Lotteries' (for short, "On-line Lotteries") for organising, distribution, marketing and sale of ticket of On-line Lotteries, throughout the State of Meghalaya involving the transaction of great financial magnitude without the Cabinet approval. The petitioner has claimed that he, being a public interest spirited citizen, having no personal, private, political or profit motivation and basically having concern with the welfare and development of the State of Meghalaya economically and socially, filed this PIL on the basis of information gathered from the reports of news item published in a local daily "The Shillong Times" dated 13.5.02 and 28.6.02. According to him, if this agreement is allowed to be implemented, the same will have adverse effect on the public exchequer of the Govt. of Meghalaya inasmuch as the Govt. revenue to the tune of thousands of crores of rupees would be siphoned off for causing illegal gain and profit to the persons involved in the impugned agreements. Since the matter relates to public largesse, the State respondents ought to have floated notice inviting tenders from the eligible persons for such purpose and hence the entire action lacks transparency and fairness and smacks not only malafide but also a conspiracy to defraud the State coffer severely affecting and jeoperdising the development of the State of Meghalaya. In view of the same, a direction has been sought for directing the State respondents to withdraw, recall or otherwise forbear to give effect to the impugned agreements as well as for quashment of the impugned agreements and also to refer the entire matter to the Central Bureau of Investigation for proper investigation in this regard. All the State respondents including the Private Respondent No. 5 have resisted the instant PIL by filing their respective affidavits- in-opposition wherein all the allegations, made in the instant petition, have been categorically refuted and denied.

(2.) Heard Mr. GK Bhatacharyya, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. H.S. Thangkhiew, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. A. Sarma, learned Advocate General, Meghalaya assisted by Mrs. B. Dutta, learned Govt. Counsel for the State of Meghalaya and also heard Mr. KN Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Upadhyaya, learned Counsel appearing for the private respondent No. 5.

(3.) At the very outset, Mr. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 has raised a preliminary objection as regards the maintainability of this PIL. His argument, in this regard primarily, is three fold : Firstly. The petitioner has no locus standi to file this petition in the nature of PIL because the petitioner, having suffered no public or legal injury by such state action, has failed to make out a case of public interest as manifestly evident from the contentions and averments made in the petition itself. Secondly there is delay and laches in filing this PIL inasmuch as when the impugned agreements were executed on 7.9.01 and 23.4.02 and the Respondent No. 5 has since invested huge amount of money pursuant to the impugned agreements for their implementation, this PIL has been filed only on 14.7.02. Thirdly - the appointment of Distributorship of On-line Lotteries, being an economic policy of the Govt., cannot be challenged in PIL.