Public Interest Litigation requires proper standing and evidence; a petitioner must join affected parties and cannot solely rely on hearsay.

JUDGMENT

D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)

CM APPL. 32761/2021 (exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 10629/2021

1. This so-called Public Interest Litigation has been filed seeking following reliefs:

"1. Allow the above writ petition of the petitioner and issue writ in the form of mandamus or direction/order/guideline of like nature thereby directing the respondent no. 1 and 2 to demolish the booked illegal and unauthorized construction as per the list of properties already supplied to them.

2. Issue of writ of mandamus to the respondent no. 1 and 2 in the form of mandamus or direction/order/guideline of like nature thereby directing the respondent no. 1 and 2 to book the unbooked illegal and unauthorized construction as per the list of properties already supplied to them.

3. Issue of writ of mandamus to the respondent no.1 and 2 in the form of mandamus or direction/order/guideline of like nature thereby directing the respondent no. 1 and 2 to initiate enquiry/disciplinary/legal action against the corrupt officials of the respondent no.2 as per the list provided who are protecting illegal or unauthorized encroachment.

4. Pass any other order or further order/(s) at this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice."

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the properties which are mentioned at Page Nos.21 and 22 are unauthorised and illegal constructions and the same are not being demolished by the concerned Respondent authorities and therefore the present petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel further submits that at Page 22 of the memo of this petition the list of properties which are illegal in nature and hence require complete demolition.

4. For ready reference, the list at Page 22 is reproduced below:

5. Learned counsel further submits that they were informed about the illegality of the constructions by persons living in the surroundings of such constructions. This is their source of knowledge. The photographs of the properties have also been annexed.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this is not a Public Interest Litigation. This is a blackmailing type of litigation.

7. When we put to the learned counsel for the Petitioner that as to how this Petitioner came to know about the illegality of construction of the aforesaid properties which are enumerated in Paragraph 14 at Page 22 of the petition, it is answered by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that persons who are living in surroundings of such constructions have conveyed to this Petitioner. The aforesaid answer is an evasive answer. Petitioner has no knowledge at all about the legality or otherwise of the construction in question for the properties which are mentioned at Page 22 and referred hereinabove.

8. The Petitioner has filed this petition without proper homework and onl