Calcutta High Court: While hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the recognition granted to a medical college on the grounds of violation of certain required provisions, a Division bench of T. S. Sivagnanam, CJ., and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J., while held that the present writ petition is not maintainable as the same is originated by private motives of the petitioners who have direct and substantial interest in the establishment of the medical college.
In the instant matter, a public interest writ petition was filed by the petitioners against the respondent 16, an educational and research trust that has established a medical college on a specific piece of land. The petitioners claim that the provisions of the West Bengal Land & Land Reforms Act, 1955, and the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973, have been violated, and therefore, the medical college should not be granted recognition or allowed to admit students.
While examining the parameters for entertaining a PIL and referring to the Supreme Court judgment in State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal, (2010) 3 SCC 402 and K. Kumara Gupta v. Sri Markendaya and Sri Omkareswara Swamy Temple, (2022) 5 SCC 710, the Court emphasizes the need to verify the credentials of the petitioner and ensure that the petition is genuinely based on public interest and not motivated by personal vendetta or vested interests.
The Court observed that all the three petitioners have a direct and substantial interest in the establishment of the medical college by the respondent 16 and they are closely associated with the process and, thus, the writ petition is deemed not to be genuine PIL but motivated by private motives.
The Court held that the present writ petition is not maintainable and dismisses it. The Court opined that the dismissal does not imply approval of all actions by the respondent 16 and placed the responsibility on respondent 16 to address any queries raised against them and satisfy the concerned authorities.
[Kallol Chatterjee v. State of W.B., 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 2237, order dated 31-07-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Soumya Majumder Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee Mr. Debashis Banerjee Mr. Supreem Naskar Mr. Rakesh jana, Counsel for the Petitioners
Mr. Samrat Sen, Ld. AAAG Mr. T. M. Siddique Mr. Deepnath Roy Chowdhury, Counsel for the State
Mr. Indranil Roy Mr. Sunit Kumar Roy, Counsel for the National Medical Commission
Mr. Pratik Dhar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Samir Halder Ms. Cardina Roy Mr. Aritra Roy Chaudhuri, Counsel for the Respondent nos. 16 & 17
