HC dismisses suspended employee’s PIL over `100-crore ‘scam’ in Punjab jails

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a suspended jail employee alleging a `100crore scam in 28 Punjab central jails for purchase of daily needs items, terming it as nonmaintainable.

The petitioner, Karamjit Singh Bhullar, a suspended jail official, had filed the PIL seeking a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) or by a special investigation team.

It was alleged that inferior daily needs items and canteen goods were being purchased for the prisoners at exorbitant rates from an unapproved stores without calling any tender, e-tender, quotation and without comparison of the prices with other whole sellers in violation of the provisions of canteen rules, the financial rules and government directions. “In the last three years, purchases of about `100 crore have been made in violation of the rules”, the petitioner alleged.

He had earlier filed a criminal miscellaneous petition in high court which was withdrawn after a single-judge bench granted him liberty to avail appropriate remedy including filing of the PIL.

“The fact remains that the petitioner is under suspension and an FIR also stands registered against him. Therefore, in the circumstances it cannot be said that the petitioner is acting pro bono public (professional work undertaken voluntarily) in filing the present petition and in view of the FIR registered against him and also the fact that he has been suspended from his service, it can be said that it has been filed for private interests,” the high court bench of justice SS Saron and justice Lisa Gill said, adding that a person approaching the high court by way of a PIL is to approach it for the “vindication of rights” of persons affected.

The division bench further recorded that PIL cannot be invoked by a person or body of persons to satisfy his or its personal grudge and enmity. If such petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, are entertained it would amount to “abuse” of process of the court.

“Therefore, the petition at the behest of the petitioner who is under litigation with his department is not to be allowed to lightly litigate by way of Public Interest Litigation and espouse his own cause and satisfy his personal grudge and enmity,” the HC bench said terming the petition non-maintainable and further recording that he had no locus standi to file the petition.