A Public Interest Litigation cannot be maintained when the petitioner has a personal interest in the matter.

SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI, J.

1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, styled as a Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner has, inter alia, challenged a development agreement, dated September, 29, 2010 by and between the Board of Wakf, West Bengal and the private respondents, i.e., respondents nos. 10, 11 and 12. The petitioner has also challenged the building plan sanctioned by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation in respect of the wakf estate in the name of Arun Gomes, i.e., the respondent no. 10 herein.

2. The petitioner claims that he has been actively participating in the cause of protection and preservation of the wakf properties and especially the Sajeda Banu @ Majeda Banu Wakf Estate at 43 Imdad Ali Lane, Kolkata 700016 (hereinafter referred to as “the said wakf”). He is a member of the committee selected by the local people and had applied before the Board of Wakf (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Board’) for their appointment as Committee of Mutawallis. The premises referred to above has been recorded as a wakf estate for more than 75 years. In the year 2000 three persons were re-appointed as Joint Mutawallis in respect of the said wakf for a period of five years.

3. The petitioner alleged that one Arun Gomes, i.e., respondent no. 10 herein, in collusion with respondents nos. 11 and 12 aided and abetted by the respondent no. 3 and members of the Board had conspired to usurp and misappropriate the wakf property of the said wakf estate. The petitioner mentions some methods by which this conspiracy was worked out. According to him the wakf estate was recorded in the name of a fictitious person viz., Syed Ali Mirza who had executed a lease deed in the year 2002 in favour of the respondent no. 10 granting a lease for a period of 81 years. By the said deed of lease the respondent no. 10 was granted the right of demolition, construction and erection and sale of the said premises. The respondent no. 10 mutated his name as the lessee in respect of the said premises and on May 4, 2004 he entered into a development agreement with the respondent no. 11 for developing the said wakf estate. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation also had sanctioned a building plan in the name of the respondent no. 10. Demolition work had started at the wakf property. The Board assumed the management of the property but did not take any step either against the said Syed Ali Mirza or the respondents nos. 10, 11 and 12. On September 28, 2010 the Board entered into an agreement with the respondents nos. 10, 11 and 12 for causing development of the said premises.

4. From these series of events the petitioner has concluded that the Board was hand in gloves with the private respondents and they had dismissed the Mutawalli Committee only to assuage the public outcry as an eyewash. The petitioner has mentioned certain facts which, he says, will make the complicity of the Board and its members in aiding and abetting the misappropriation of the wakf property clear. From these facts the petitioner has also drawn one more conclusion that the Board has a nexus with the private respondents for their mutual benefits. The local people are also said to have addressed a letter in July, 2010 to the respondent no. 3 requesting the Board to refrain from indulging in any unauthorized and unlawful activity. The work of the construction had started in April, 2011 and in a meeting held with the respondents nos. 11 and 12 for the first time the agreement dated September, 2010 for the development of the wakf property was revealed. By this the Board authorized the private respondents to develop the wakf property and to reap the benefits therefrom. The petitioner has also criticised the terms and conditions of the development agreement as demonstrating a mala fide intention and ulterior motive on the part of the Board. A notice by the petitioner produced no result. The Board has assumed the direct management of the estate in August, 2005. In terms