Public interest litigants must have clean hands and credible credentials, and the courts must validate claims to prevent frivolous petitions, while retaining the sanctity of public interest litigation.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. The instant matter is taken up today for passing an appropriate order with regard to the maintainability of the instant writ petition which is in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation since the issue of maintainability was raised by the respondent no. 17.

2. At the time of hearing, Mr. Mookherjee, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 17 at the very outset draws attention of this Court to the prayers as made in the instant writ petition. It is submitted by Mr. Mookherjee that the crux of the instant writ petition is the alleged violation on the part of the respondent authorities regarding the different clauses of the notification dated 27.09.1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said notification of 1996’) as published by Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest as well as the terms and conditions of the lease deed dated 28.06.2024 as executed in favour of the respondent no. 17 by the respondent no. 3 authority.

3. It is argued by Mr. Mookherjee that from the pleadings of the said writ petition it would reveal that the facts as involved in the instant writ petition are not correct, the same is found to be unverified one. It is further submitted by Mr. Mookherjee that in terms of the provision of Clause B(iii) of the said notification of 1996 it would reveal that the subject matter of the instant writ petition is situated beyond the area as mentioned therein and thus by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the said notification of 1996 has got any manner of application in the instant writ petition.

4. Drawing attention to Annexure R-10 of the affidavit-in-opposition as filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 3, 4, 5 and 13 being a copy of the notification dated 18.01.2019 as published by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, it is argued by Mr. Mookherjee that the said notification of 2019 squarely applies to the present lis and on careful perusal of Clause 2.3.3 of the said notification of 2019 it would reveal that the project of the respondent no. 17 is beyond the scope of NDZ and thus there is no necessity to obtain permission from the port authority for the on-going project as initiated by the respondent no. 17.

5. In his next limb of submission, Mr. Mookherjee contended that from the cause title of the instant writ petition it would reveal that the writ petitioner is a resident of Garia under P.S. Narendrapur, Kolkata- 700084. It is further argued by Mr. Mookherjee that on perusal of paragraph 2, 3 and 4 of the instant writ petition it would reveal that it is the grievance of the writ petitioner that allegedly an illegal construction is going on within 500 meter of the bank of the river Hooghly which is far away from the residential locality of the writ petitioner and thus, the writ petitioner has miserably failed to substantiate the alleged public interest as involved in the instant writ petition.

6. It is further argued by Mr. Mookherjee that the writ petitioner while filing the instant public interest litigation has distorted the truth inasmuch as in the instant writ petiti