Bindhyachal Devi vs The State of Jharkhand, & Ors.

By way of a Public Interest Litigation, this petitioner has prayed

for the following relief which is quoted below for better appreciation.

" To direct the respondents to pass reasoned order on the

application dated 15.3.2016 and 12.7.2016 submitted by the petitioner

in the interest of students studying in Jharkhand State in the Inter

Colleges and + 2 High Schools, so that the schools/inter colleges should

effectively impart the teaching to the students who are studying in Inter

Colleges/ +2 High Schools affiliated by Jharkhand Academic Council and

grant in aid given by the State of Jharkhand through Human Resources

Development Department, Government of Jharkhand.

Further amend the Jharkhand Academic Council Act, 2002 and rule

which has been issued by notification dated 4.3.2003 in terms of

representation dated 15.3.2016 and 12.7.2016 and also amend the

notification dated 27.12.2005 issued by the Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi and also

amend the Acts and Rules considering the representation dated

15.3.2016 and 12.7.2016 submitted by the students who are studying in

Inter Colleges/ + 2 High Schools. The number of Inter College 300 (190

are permanent affiliated + 110 provisionally affiliated by J.A.C, Ranchi.

Petitioner further prays that during pendency of this W.P.(PIL) and

till reorganization of committee an interim order may kindly be given to

continue the functioning of the Ex-Committee in the Public Interest as in

absence of Committee, the teacher and staffs will suffer irreparable loss

due to non payment of their salary as Secretary of the Committee is the

authority competent to put signature on cheques as per bye-laws of the

Managing Committee.

And/or any other relief/s for which the petitioner is legally entitled

and the Hon''ble Court may think fit and proper in the interest of

students who are studying in Inter Colleges/ + 2 High Schools within the

State of Jharkhand."

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the

founder Secretary of one "Gramoday Chetna Kendra". He submits that

this Gramoday Chetna Kendra has established a college under the

name and style of "Upendra Nath Verma, Inter College". The disputes

revolves around the managing committee of this college.

He submits that this petitioner is a donor member of the said

college also. Being a donor member, he is permanent member of the

Managing Committee of the College. It is submitted that the term of the

Managing Committee has come to an end and no new Managing

Committee has been formed to take over charge. He submits that due

to absence of a new Managing Committee, not only Inter College is

suffering, but the teachers and students are also suffering, as the

teachers are not getting salary regularly. He submits that college is

getting aid from the Government as such, the grievance set forth in

this writ application needs to be addressed. He submits that representation has been given to the Government but the same is

pending, has not yet been disposed of. He submits that the Government

should come up with a relevant provision and should legislate as to

what would happen, if the term of existing committee expires and

should ensure that the erstwhile committee should continue till new

committee takes over.

From perusal of the writ application and from the argument of

petitioner, it is apparent that the the petitioner has come up with the

personal grievance in this Public Interest Litigation. Further from

perusal of the interim prayer of the petitioner, we can understand that

he is praying for an order to allow Ex-Managing Committee to function

in absence of any permanent committee.

It is admitted that the petitioner is a member of the Ex-Managing

Committee. It is admitted that the petitioner is donor member of the

college and he was the founder secretary of "Gramoday Chetna

Kendra".

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Janata Dal vs.

H.S.Chowdhary and others [(1992) 4 SCC 305] in para 98 has held

as under:

"While this Court has laid down a chain of notable decisions with

all emphasis at their command about the importance and significance of

this newly-developed doctrine of PIL, it has also hastened to sound a red

alert and a note of severe warning that courts should not allow its

process to be abused by a mere busybody or a meddlesome interloper

or wayfarer or officious intervener without any interest or concern

except for personal gain or private profit or other oblique consideration.

In the subsequent paragraph of the said judgment it has also been

observed as follows:

" It is thus clear that only a person acting bone fide and having

sufficient interest in the proceeding of PIL will alone have a locus standi

and can approach the court to wipe out the tears of the poor and needy, suffering from violation of their fundamental rights, but not a person for

personal gain or private profit or political motive or any oblique

consideration.

Vexatious petition under the colour of PIL brought before this

Court for vindicating any personal grievance deserves rejection at the

threshold.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashok kumar Pandey

vs. State of West Bengal [(2004) 3 SCC 349] has held that

the PIL is a weapon which is to be used with great care and

circumspection and court has to be extremely careful to see that behind

the beautiful veil of public interest, an ugly private malice, public

interest and/or publicity seeking is not working. It is to be used as an

effective weapon in the armoury of law for delivering sufficient justice

to the citizen.

It is now well settled that the court must not allow its process to

be abused for oblique consideration. The person with vested interest in

indulging in meddling judicial process must be wiped out.

A petition filed by these persons which is for oblique motive and

personal gain deserves to be thrown out at the threshold and with

exemplary cost.

Applying this above ratio, we find that the petitioner has got

personal interest in the entire litigation. He was a member of the

committee whose term has expired. It is his claim that being a donor

member, he is supposed to be in the committee throughout his life. His

interim prayer fortifies the belief of this Court that this petition has been

filed for personal gain giving colour of PIL. He was revival of the

erstwhile committee.

On putting a question to the concened Advocate, he submits that

since there are three hundred Inter Colleges facing same difficulty with

the Managing Committee so keeping in view large number of Inter

Colleges, this petition has become a PIL. We cannot digest the said submission. In fact, the petitioner has filed this application to get a seal

from this Court so that he can remain in the Managing Committee. No

right, far less a fundamental right, of any group is effected. If any right

of the petitioner is infringed, it is open to him to seek appropriate relief

before the appropriate forum. P.I.L cannot be used for this purpose.

Thus, this Court is of the opinion that this Public Interest Litigation

is not maintainable as the same has been filed for the benefit of the

petitioner.

This writ petition is thus dismissed.