IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17540 of 2008(S) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ADV.M.L.GEORGE, AVE MARIA, ACHANVEETTIL ROAD, PACHALAM P.O., KOCHI - 682 012. BY ADV. SRI.M.L.GEORGE (PARTY-IN-PERSON) RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. GOVT. OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, STATE EXCISE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM GOLF CLUB, KOWDIYAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.D.ANIL KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L. DATTU, C.J. & A.K. BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 17540 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of June, 2008 Judgment H.L. Dattu, C. J: Petitioner claims that he is a social activist. He claims that he is the President of National Foundation for Consumer Awareness and Studies; the founder and the first General Secretary of Visala Kochi Kudivella Samrakshana Samithi; and General Convener of 'Clarion', which is a united forum for social organizations. 2. This petition is styled as 'Public Interest Litigation'. After going through the pleadings, the main prayers sought in the writ petition and the interim reliefs, we are of the opinion that the petition filed is 'publicity interest litigation' or 'private interest litigation'. We say so keeping in view what has been observed by the Supreme Court in one case that the phrase “public interest litigation” is intended to mean nothing more than what the words themselves state, namely, “litigation in the interest of the public”. The expression in common parlance means an act beneficial to the general public. Thus a thing is said to be a public interest where it is or can be made to appear to be contributive to the general welfare of the community at large. The spheres where the courts have intervened through public interest action over the years have been categorised succinctly by Prof. Sathe under the following parameters: “(i) Where the concerns underlying a petition are not individualist but are shared W.P(C).No.17540/08 : 2 : widely by a large number of people (bonded labour, undertrial prisoners, prison inmates. (ii) Where the affected persons belong to the disadvantaged sections of society (women, children, bonded labour, unorganised labour etc). (iii) Where judicial law making is necessary to avoid exploitation (inter-country adoption, the education of the children of the prostitutes), (iv) Where judicial intervention is necessary for the protection of the sanctity of democratic institutions (independence of the judiciary, existence of grievances redressal forums). (v) Where administrative decisions related to development are harmful to the environment and jeopardise people's to natural resources such as air or water.” 3. In the writ petition petitioner seeks the following reliefs. They are: W.P(C).No.17540/08 : 3 : “i) to call for the records leading to the issuance of a Foreign Liquor Bar License to the Trivandrum Golf Club and quash the license by the issue of a writ of certiorari or such other writ,m order or direction to the 3rd respondent; ii) to direct to hold a Vigilance Enquiry as to how the liquor bar license was issued to the 5th respondent illegally by the 3rd respondent for taking disciplinary action against the officials responsible for the illegal activity; iii) to declare that the Trivandrum Golf Club does not have any right to hold a liquor bar license; iv) to declare that a sporting club or Gymkhana or a Club registered under Travancore Cochin Scientific, Literary and Charitable Societies Act, 1955 has no right to maintain a liquor bar in the premises of the Club; v) to direct the 2nd respondent to review and revoke within a period of 3 months all the cases of licenses of Foreign Liquor Bar granted to Sporting Clubs/Gymkhanas or the Clubs registered under Travancore Cochin Scientific, Literary and Charitable Societies Act, 1955; vi) to direct the Government of Kerala to resume the properties of the Government land and buildings now in possession with various Clubs who have violated the terms and conditions of Government lease agreement within a period of 3 months;” 4. At the outset, we are constrained to state that it is not the case of the petitioner that he had approached the competent authorities under the Excise Act and the Rules framed thereunder or the State Government W.P(C).No.17540/08 : 4 : with a request to cancel the Excise licence granted to the third respondent or any other club or to resume the properties of the Government including land and building now in possession with various clubs who have violated the terms and conditions of lease agreement. The authorities under the Act and the State Government are vested with power under statutes to cancel a Bar licence if the clubs are violating the terms and conditions of the licence and the State Government also has the power to terminate lease agreement in accordance with law, if the covenants in the lease agreement is violated or contravened by the lessee. This was the initial step that should have been resorted to by the petitioner before approaching this Court. If for any reason the authorities under the Excise Act or the State Government does not act or react to the request of the petitioner or if they show cold response inspite of repeated requests then only as a last resort he could have approached this Court for appropriate reliefs by producing sufficient material evidence in support of the assertions and allegations made in the petition. Firstly, on this count the petition requires to be rejected. Secondly, the reliefs sought in the petition by no stretch of imagination can be termed as 'public interest'. To fall within the purview of the Public Interest Litigation, the basic requirements are, that there must be public injury caused by wrongful or ultra vires acts or omissions of the State or public authority or it must be for the enforcement of basic human rights of weaker sections of the society. In our view, these essential ingredients are lacking in this Writ W.P(C).No.17540/08 : 5 : Petition. Therefore, we have no hesitation to characterise this petition as a frivolous litigation by a person having vested interest. Therefore, as suggested by the Apex Court in Kushumlata's case ((2006) 6 SCC 180), this petition requires to be thrown out at the threshold. We do so by rejecting the petition without issuing any notice to the respondents. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU Chief Justice A.K. BASHEER Judge an/.