TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e affidavit in support of the writ petition, respondent No.1, in order to establish his locus standi to file the public interest litigation stated as under:- I am an Agriculturist. I am a staunch devotee of Lord Venkateswara since my childhood. I regularly visit the temple to offer my prayers to God. I also have donated to the temple as per my capacity. I am a citizen of this country and a Hindu by religion. I am a native and a resident of Tirupathi. I have come to know certain misdeeds, discrepancies, Mismanagement of the T.T.D. Funds by some vested interests. As a citizen of India and also as a staunch devotee of Lord Venkateswara, it is my bounden duty to bring the said facts, which have come to my knowledge, to the notice of this Honourable Court for appropriate directions of this Honourble Court. I also submit that I have no personal interest in filing the above writ affidavit nor I have any enmity with the persons whose details are furnished hereunder and against the persons certain directions are sought in this Writ Petition. This Writ Petition is being filed in the larger interest of the public. 4. He has further pleaded that the Temple was established as a result o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two years from 2 nd August, 2007 to 1st August, 2009 and Roc No. P1/308/Sri TT/ml/2009 dated 1st August, 2009 for a further period of two years i.e. from 2nd August, 2009 to 1st August, 2011. 7. The respondent claimed that these extensions were wholly illegal and arbitrary exercise of power by the TTD Board. These allegations were made relying on the recommendations made by B.V. Ramana Kumar, IPS, the then Chief Vigilance and Security Officer. In his report dated 28th July, 2008 initiation of disciplinary action for major penalty has been recommended against the appellant. This report was deliberately ignored by the TTD Board and the appellant continued to enjoy the patronage of the Board. 8. The writ petition came up for hearing before the High Court on 9th November, 2009. Whilst issuing notice in the writ petition, the High Court made an interim order which was as follows:- And it is further ordered that there shall be interim suspension of the proceedings bearing Roc. No. P1/308/Sri/TT/Tml/2009, dated 01-08-2009 of the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, which was issued in pursuance of Resolution No. 178 dated: 28.07.2009 of the TTD Board, extending the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtaining to a service matter which could not be filed in a writ petition styled as a public interest litigation. In support of the submission, the learned counsel relied on the following judgments of this Court:- Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and Ors. Vs. Jitendra Kumar Mishra (1998) 7 SCC 273, Gurpal Singh Vs. S tate of Punjab and Ors. (2005) 5 SCC 136, Neetu Vs. State of Punjab Ors. (2007) 10 SCC 614 and Divine Retreat Centre Vs. State of Kerala Ors. (2008) 3 SCC 542. He further submitted that in any event, the petition was not filed by respondent No.1 bonafide. It has been filed at the behest of some persons, who are the hidden forces pursuing the writ petition. Last but not the least, it is the submission of Mr. Narsimha that the High Court judgment deserves to be set aside on the short ground that it is based on a complete misinterpretation of the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Employees Service Rules, 1989. According to the learned senior counsel, the aforesaid rules would not be applicable to the petitioner as his service has been extended only on contractual basis. Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, counsel for the Temple, respondent No.4 has supported the submissions made by Mr. Narsim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... special occasion, his services are very much required for successful and timelyconduct of fairs and festivals. 2. He is well versed with the procedures of various sevas that are being performed in Sri. Tirumala Temple. 3. His services are vastly utilized during Kalyanamasthu programs organized throughout the country. He could able to conduct the programs successfully to keep up the gallery of the institution. 4. Apart from all his role in extending honours to various Matadhipathies/Peetadhipathies visiting Srivari Temple is commendable and he is maintaining a good rapport with all the Swamijis, Matadhipathies and Peetadhipathies which is much essential for the religious institutions like TTD. 5. Besides, he is available round the clock for all the 365 days in a year for the administration to organize various programs like Bhajagovindam, Kalyanam being conducted outside and other religious activities. 17. Pursuant to the aforesaid Resolution, the Board passed a formal order on 1st August, 2009 extending the services of the appellant till 1st August, 2011 on contract basis on payment of monthly remuneration at last pay drawn. The High Court has nullified the Resoluti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt by the respondent No.1 would clearly show that the respondent No.1 has no special concern with the extension granted to the appellant. Respondent No.1 had merely pleaded that he moved the writ petition as he is a devotee of Lord Venkateswara. He is an agriculturist by profession. The appellant has failed to supply any specific particulars as to how he is in possession of any special information. The controversy with regard to the management and administration of the Temple s properties and funds have been deliberately mixed up with the extension granted to the appellant by the TTD Board. It is an admitted position that different proceedings are pending with regard to the management controversy of the Temple Trust. The aforesaid controversy had no relevance to the extension granted to the appellant. The writ petition seems to have been actuated by some disgruntled elements. He has also failed to show as to how and in what manner he represents the public interest. 21. This Court in the case of (DR.) B. Singh Vs. Union of India Ors. (2004) 3 SCC 363 quoted with approval the definition of public interest as stated in the report of Public Interest Law, USA, 1976 by the cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial process either by force of habit or from improper motives. Often they are actuated by a desire to win notoriety or cheap popularity. The petitions of such busybodies deserve to be thrown out by rejection at the threshold, and in appropriate cases, with exemplary costs. 24. This Court again in the case of Divine Retreat Centre (Supra) reiterated that public interest litigation can only be entertained at the instance of bonafide litigants. It cannot be permitted to be used by unscrupulous litigants to disguise personal or individual grievances as public interest litigations. The facts placed on record in the present proceeding would clearly indicate that the appellant has not come to Court with clean hands. He has failed to establish his credential for moving the writ petition as public interest litigation. In our opinion, the High Court has failed to examine the matter in its correct perspective. The writ petition was undoubtedly moved by motives other than what was stated in the writ petition. A perusal of the affidavit in support of the writ petition would clearly show that the writ petition had been filed by the petitioner at the instance of some other persons who are hid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow the factors which weighed with the court in determining the lis between the parties. This Court in the case of Vasudeo Vishwanath Saraf Vs. New Education Institute Ors. 1986 (4) SCC 31 clearly indicated the bare essentials of an order passed by the High Court while disposing of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In paragraph 14, it is observed as follows:- 14. It is a cardinal principle of rule of law which governs our policy that the court including Writ Court is required to record reasons while disposing of a writ petition in order to enable the litigants more particularly the aggrieved party to know the reasons which weighed with the mind of the court in determining the questions of facts and law raised in the writ petition or in the action brought. This is imperative for the fair and equitable administration of justice. More so when there is a statutory provision for appeal to the higher court in the hierarchy of courts in order to enable the superior court or the appellate court to know or to be apprised of the reasons which impelled the court to pass the order in question. This recording of reasons in deciding cases or applications affect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
