IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 7147 of 2008(A) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER:- ------------------ JOY, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.PAULOSE, NELLINILKKUMTHADATHIL, AMBALAVAYAL, AMBALAVAYAL VILLAGE, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE SMT.K.V.LEKSHMY SRI.K.VINODKUMAR (707/89) RESPONDENTS:- ----------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE GOVERNMENT SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER, N.H & ADMINISTRATION, PWD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, N.H.NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKKODE. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H.DIVISION, KOZHIKKODE. 5. RAJEENDRAN, GOVT.CONTRACTOR, NADU CONSTRUCTIONS, THONDIYAD, KOZHIKKODE. 6. VINCENT, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PWD CONTRACTOR, POOMALA, WAYANAD DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.Dattu,C.J. & K.M.Joseph,J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7147 of 2008-S ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 7th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu,C.J. We do not see any public interest in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In our opinion, the petitioner is projecting the grievance of the respondents 5 and 6. The litigation so filed by the petitioner cannot come within the expression “public interest litigation” as propounded by the apex Court in various decisions starting from Janata Dal v. H.S.Chowdhary [(1992) 4 SCC 305). 2. Keeping in view the definition and the explanation that is given by the apex Court on the expression “locus standi” and “public interest litigation” and applying those principles to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that though it is named as public interest litigation, it does not have the characteristics of a public interest litigation. Therefore, we decline to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition requires to be rejected and it s rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice K.M.Joseph Judge vku/DK