KASHI PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this public interest litigation petition, the petitioners seek issuance of Writ of Mandamus quashing order dated January 23, 2009, being ultra vires, non-est and bad in the eyes of law; further issuance of appropriate writ or direction declaring that the Council of Ministers, without having resolved and passed in the Legislative Assembly as contemplated under Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952(hereinafter referred to as `the Act of 1952'), cannot appoint a Commission to investigate into any definite matter of public significance, and inconsistent with the touch stone of rules and the Law; further direction declaring that no Commission can be constituted by the newly elected Government to look into and investigate the decisions taken by the previous Council of Ministers, to wreak vengeance, being impermissible in law.

(2.) The petitioners have averred in the petition that they do not owe allegiance to any political party and are interested in the well governance of the State by any political party in power and are aggrieved because of the fact that the aim and object behind the move to appoint a Commission by the Respondent-State Government vide order dated 23.01.2009 is to wreak vengeance against the previous Government, therefore, suffers from political vendetta with which it is motivated rather than the idea of doing justice to the public. The petitioners do not at all support the mal-practices and acts of misconduct, illegalities and arbitrariness, rampant at large in the administrative circles.

(3.) It has been further averred by the petitioners that the impugned order is an eye wash as the Commission known as Justice N.N. Mathur Commission (hereinafter referred to as `the Commission') has been constituted ignoring the provisions of the Act of 1952 to fulfill the political agenda of the Government reflected in the Political Manifesto of the party in power and broadly campaigned during the Assembly Elections of 2008, maligning the previous Government being corrupt. The petitioners are not against the investigation of the mal practices of the previous Government and that the present Government has the power to appoint a Commission for inquiry into matter of great public significance. Notwithstanding that the Commission has been appointed in derogation to the procedure provided in the Act of 1952 framed by the Legislature. Such a Commission of Inquiry to investigate the affairs and decisions taken under the regime of the previous Government will set a bad practice in the State and the whole democratic setup will be demolished by such action.