B.C.Basak and S.K.Singh JJ.

1. This is a Public" Interest Litigation and prima facie, we are satisfied that this can be entertained as such.

2. In this petition, the petitioner, which is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, has made serious allegations regarding collection of revenue payable to the State. The allegations are of the nature that there has been evasion of tax in this State to the tune of crores of rupees. By this petition, the petitioner seeks suitable direction for ascertaining the correct position by locating the person responsible for the same and recover the amount. Details have been given in the petition and the supplementary affidavit in support of the petition. We shall merely indicate some of them. Though the petition is based on a report published in the Hindi Daily "Nav Bharat Times" dated 24th August, 1991, but it is not based on merely a newspaper "gossip", but such publication is on the basis of a report of the respondent No. 5. Respondent No. 5 is the Comptroller and Auditor-General of the Government of India, New Delhi. It is alleged that from the said report it appears as follows:

(1) The State has suffered a loss of Rupees 2 crores and 22 lacs in 188 cases on account of negligence of the Commercial Tax Officer.

(2) The concerned officer did not impose taxes on the items which were subject to taxes under different tax laws.

(3) The concerned officer imposed less amount of taxes illegally and in collusion of the tax payer.

(4) Respondent No. 5 had cited 104 cases whereunder assessment have been found for the year 1986-87,

(5) There are about 61 F. I. Rs. lodged in different Police Stations by concerned Sales Tax Officer with regard to theft of Form C.

(6) In the report of C. A. G. for the year ending 31-3-1987, it is stated that 24 thousands Booklet each containing 25 Form C are still not being finalised. It is alleged that same have been misused by and in connivance with the Commercial Tax Authority, It is alleged that the State has not taken any action and by filing F.I.R. such actions are being forestalled.

(7) By March 1987, 2618 Inspection Reports were submitted of which reply could not be submitted by the Officer concerned by September, 1987.

(8) Respondent No. 5 had found a case of under assessment in the department of Excise by examining 1570 cases in which the Government had suffered a loss of Rs. 7,784.11 lacs.

(9) Respondent No. 5 had found a case of loss of Rs. 145-65 lacs in the department of Transportation in which no tax was imposed on 1050 cases.

(10) Respondent No. 5 had found a loss of Rs. 548,633 lacs of revenue on account of revenue Circle in which Cess, Salami and Commercial Taxes were not imposed in 204 cases.

(11) Respondent No. 5 had found a loss of Rs. 254-77 lacs in Mining Department in 360 cases in which rent, cess, royalty fees etc. were under assessed.

(12) Respondent No. 5 has released a Press-note of the Audit Report of the year ending on 31st March, 1987 in which the State Government had to suffer huge loss of crores.

3. In this case, an affidavit has been affirmed by Respondents No. 4 and 5, Respondent No. 4 being the Accountant-General which is a very unusual affidavit to say the least. A point is taken therein that this is not a Public Interest Litigation. It is curious that such a stand is being taken by the Respondent No. 5 when the allegation of loss of Revenue is based on his own report.

4. There is an affidavit on behalf of the Respondent No. 3 (Finance Commissioner) which has been affirmed by a Special Officer in his office and he has dealt with some of the allegations but we do not find the same to be specific.

5. Having regard to the same and having regard to the very serious allegations in the said report of C. A. G., we are of the view that this matter should be gone into by the Finance Commissioner himself who is one of the senior most and responsible Officer of the Government as we expect that he would apply his mind indep