9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (7) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of crores of rupees and these plans were earlier disapproved, but now in order to give advantage to these Societies, the plans have been approved. He alleged that the ulterior motive disclosed by the Rajasthan Patrika was an eye opener. 3. These three Societies were (i) Subhash Sindhi Grah Nirman Samiti (hereinafter to be referred to as the Sindhi Samiti), (ii) Ramjupura Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti') (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Ramjipura Samiti') and (iii) Meena Colony Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Meena Colony') 4. In Clause (b) of paragraph 10 of the writ petition, the petitioner alleged: That the news item makes reference of Ramjupura Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti but same has been controverted by the office bearers of the society and because of the controversy, the petitioner is not dealing with this item. 5. The petitioner thus left out the aforesaid Society. 6. Suggesting the motive for leaving out the Ramjupura Samiti, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 urged that the same had been done, with ulterior motive and for personal gain, inasmuch as, if the scheme of Ramjipura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is only hearsay evidence. Newspaper is not one of the documents referred to in Section 78(2) of the Evidence Act by which an allegation of fact can be proved. The presumption of genuineness attached under Section 81 of the Evidence Act to a newspaper report cannot be treated as proved of the facts reported therein. A statement of fact contained in a newspaper is merely hearsay and therefore inadmissible in evidence in the absence of the maker of the statement appearing in court and deposing to have perceived the fact reported. 14. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted in reply that with regard to public affairs and the facts stated in the writ petition, on proof could be filed and while dealing with PIL, the learned Counsel urged that rule of evidence would have to be relaxed and if that was not done, no PIL would succeed. 15. The allegations made in a writ petition whether it is PIL or other has got to be based on such facts and sworn in such a manner that inspires confidence. 16. Section 81 of the Evidence Act deals with presumption about the genuineness of documents narrated therein. Even if newspapers are admissible in evidence without formal proof, the pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The mere fact that the scheme had been disapproved earlier could not be a ground to hold the present approval to be against the law and the rules. Sub-section (2) of Section 25 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act states that the Authority with the approval of the State Government may make any other modifications into the plan in order to promote planned development of any part of the Jaipur Region in more efficient manner. 20. The learned Counsel for the petitioner repeatedly urged that as the list of allottees of the land of Diamond Hill Scheme had not been supplied by the concerned respondent, the allotment was a fake and could not be considered to be as genuine or bonafide. 21. The list was admittedly supplied at the time of hearing of the writ petition. The respondent No. 4 had been called upon by an order of this Court to supply the list of allottees. Though the fact that the list had been prepared had been mentioned in the counter affidavit, but by mistake, it was not given to the petitioner. However, that omission would not illegalise the approval accorded by the J.D.A. 22. The respondent No. 3 has also established that the approval was accorded to it by the J.D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. He had neither filed any objection to the schemes submitted by the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 nor desired any plan of his to be approved. The relief claimed is of a general type. The writ petition does not give any idea of the public who would be benefited on relief being granted. The persons for whom the relief is sought must appear and make it known that they are claiming such a relief, it cannot be thrust upon them unless they wish it. 30. It is said time and again. In the word of Bhagwati, J. (as he then was) the Courts must be careful in entertaining public interest litigations or in the words of Sarkaria, j the applications of the busy bodies should be rejected at the threshold itself and as Krishma Iyer, J. has pointed out, the doors of the Courts should not be ajar, for such vexatious litigants . 31. Khalid, J. in his separate supplementing judgment in Sachidanand Pandey v. State of West Bengal said:; Today public spirited litigants rush to Courts to file cases In profusion under this attractive name. They must inspire confidence In Court and among the public. They must be above suspicion.... Public interest litigation has now come to stay. But one is led to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of locus standi of a party to a litigation is mandatory; because the legal capacity of the party to any litigation whether in private of public action in relation to any specific remedy sought for has to be primarily at the threshold. 35. It was further held: In contract, the strict rule of locus standi applicable to private litigation is relaxed and a broad rule is evolved which gives the right of locus standi to any member of the public acting bonafide and having sufficient interest in instituting an action for redressal of public wrong or public injury, but who is not a mere busy body or a meddlesome interloper; since the dominant object of PIL is to ensure observance of the provisions of the Constitution or the law which can be best achieved to advance the cause of community or disadvantaged groups and individuals or public interest by permitting any person, having no personal gain or private motivation or any other oblige consideration but acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in maintaining an action for judicial redress for public Injury to put the judicial machinery in motion like action popularise of Raman Law whereby any citizen could bring such an acti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
