Back
2024 Supreme(Gau) 966
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI, THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM, J.
Mohan Rongpi, S/o. Sri Telish Rongpi – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam Rep. By Secretary To The Govt of Assam, Deptt of Irrigation And Ors. – Respondents
PIL/7/2019
Decided On : 08-08-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. K.N. Choudhury, Sr. Adv., Mr. F. Faridi, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. D. Saikia, AG, Assam. Mr. J. Chutia, SC, KAAC.
IMPORTANT POINT
The principles of res judicata apply to public interest litigations, and a petitioner must approach the court with clean hands, disclosing any personal interests that may affect the legitimacy of the claims made.
Headnote:
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION - IRREGULARITIES IN IRRIGATION SCHEMES - AIBP, NLCPR, CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 - The court discussed the Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme (AIBP) and the North Eastern Council (NEC) schemes, emphasizing the importance of proper implementation and adherence to guidelines. The court interpreted the principles of res judicata, concluding that previous findings on similar allegations barred the current petition. The court also highlighted the necessity of following the Code of Criminal Procedure for grievances against inaction by authorities, which influenced its decision to dismiss the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Mohan Rongpi, filed a PIL alleging irregularities in the implementation of minor irrigation schemes under the AIBP in the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council area, claiming overlapping projects, misallocation of funds, and favoritism in awarding contracts. He sought a CBI investigation into these allegations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the issues raised in the current PIL were substantially similar to those in a previous PIL (No. 107/2015), which had been adjudicated and dismissed after a High Power Technical Committee found no irregularities. The court concluded that the current petition was barred by the principles of res judicata and that the petitioner lacked bona fides due to undisclosed personal interests.
Issues: Whether the current PIL is maintainable given the previous adjudication of similar issues and whether the petitioner has approached the court with clean hands.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the principles of res judicata apply to public interest litigations, preventing re-litigation of issues already decided. The court emphasized that the petitioner’s personal grievances and undisclosed interests undermined the legitimacy of the PIL.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the PIL, ruling that it was barred by res judicata and that the petitioner had not demonstrated bona fides in bringing the case.
JUDGMENT :
Suman Shyam, J.
1. Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. F. Faridi, learned counsel for the petitioner. We have also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Mr. J. Chutia, learned Standing Counsel, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council, appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition, in the form of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), has been instituted by Sri Mohan Rongpi, a resident of Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council area, alleging serious irregularities in implementation of various Minor Irrigation schemes and Flow Irrigation schemes, sanctioned under Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme (for short AIBP), more particularly, those that were implemented during the year 2012-2013, 20142014 and 2014-2015, primarily with a prayer to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct an impartial investigation and to submit enquiry report before this Court and thereafter, pass further orders based on such report.
3. In order to substantiate the plea of malfeasance on the part of the public servants serving under the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council (for short KAAC) Administration connected with the implementation of the aforementioned AIBP schemes, the petitioner has pleaded certain facts and particulars in the writ petition. It has also been stated that the petitioner had personally inspected a few sites and found that there were over-lapping with previous irrigation scheme in many sites. The particulars of sites such as (1) Borjan Composite (overlapping scheme); (2) Langparpan (overlapping scheme); (3) Dosbai (overlapping scheme); (4) Dongmepi Bey Gaon (new scheme); (5) Langphanki (new scheme); (6) Wallingdisha (new Scheme) & (7) Youangdisa (overlapping scheme) have been furnished in the writ petition. The basic allegations of the writ petitioner, reduced to their essence, are that new projects of Irrigation Schemes were shown to have been set up in sites which already had previously existing irrigation projects, thereby, causing overlapping projects leading to defrauding of the Exchequer; the projects were awarded to contractors in violation of the guidelines laid down for issuing public tenders and some of the projects have been allotted to the relatives of the then Chief Executive Member (CEM) of KAAC and his close associates; there is stark deviation between the Detail Project Report (DPR) and actual implementation of the projects; funds have been diverted illegally without actually implementing the projects.
4. With a view to highlight the aforesaid irregularities, the petitioner had submitted a complaint before the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, Chandmari, Guwahati, which was received on 11/06/2015. Six deficiencies in implementing the projects, as highlighted in the aforesaid complaint, are as follows :-
(i) Notice Inviting Tender for schemes worth less in amount have been found to get media publications while schemes worth in high amount does not got wide publications.
(ii) In the financial year 2013-14, the KAAC has received the Govt. sanctioned of 60 new MIS under AIBP whose worth stands at Rs. 43624.45 lakhs (Rupees four hundred thirty six crore twenty four lakhs and forty five thousand) only but these schemes have been in the execution stages though tender was not invited.
(iii) It is observed that a few Irrigation schemes under AIBP were executed very poorly and constructed in the premises of Private party’s ponds. The schemes in question are Doldoli LIS, whose worth stand at Rs. 389.87 lakhs (Rupees Three Crore Eighty Nine Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand only) and another is Doldoli IS whose worth at Rs. 408.759 lakhs (Rupees Four Crore Eight Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred only) and were said to have executed in 2001-12 and 2012-13 respectively.
(iv) It is also observed that KAKU Basti, irrigation schemes under NLCPR (2012-13) whose worth stands at Rs. 871.65 Lakhs (Rupees eight crore seventy one lakhs sixty five thousand only) hav
