The court emphasized the need for genuine public interest in Public Interest Litigation and cautioned against frivolous petitions with oblique motives.

V. Dhanapalan, J.

What is sought for in this Writ Petition, which is styled as Public Interest Litigation, is a direction to the second respondent to take immediate action on the petitioners complaints, dated 20.04.2009 and 21.04.2009, for entrusting the case relating to false Community Certificate produced by the first respondent to the Central Bureau of Investigation for effective action and to recover the properties before the retirement of the first respondent on 012. 2009.

2. Petitioner belongs to Indian-Hindu-Arunthathiyar community, which is classified as a Scheduled Caste. He claims to be the Managing Director of "Inthiyan Secret Detective Council Private Ltd."; Editor of "Crime Ambalam", a fortnightly magazine, and also Chairman of "Inthiyan Journalists and Detective Associations Federation". He also states that he is rendering social service to all types of consumer protection matters and protection of civil rights, human rights, ex-servicemen welfare and encouraging inter-caste marriages, providing legal aid and finding out trade mark and patent right misuse.

3. According to the petitioner, the first respondent was born Christian on 012. 1949 and baptised in Savariar R.C.Church Vadaseri at Nagercoil; he completed S.S.L.C. in Nagercoil as B.C. (R.C) and joined in the Chengalpattu Medical College in 1971 by fabricating the false community certificate as S.C.from Nagercoil; that in Kanyakumari District areas, the Bharathar Community, if it is Hindu, is classified as S.C., and, if it is Christian, is classified as B.C; the first respondent misrepresented that he is Hindu Bharathar and, as such, the Community Certificate as S.C.was issued to him by the local Revenue Authority, even though he belonged to Christianity and the certificate ought to have been issued as B.C.only. On 31.03.2007, the petitioner shot off a letter to the Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, requesting the details of the first respondent, to which, he received a reply from the Collector of Kanyakumari District that the first respondent was Christian Bharathar (Backward Class Community).

4. Also, it is the case of the petitioner that the first respondent, after completion of his medical course, got employment in Southern Railway on 12.01.1976 under S.C. Community; the first respondent had not only created bogus community certificate as S.C.for himself, but to his daughter as well for medical college and she is now employed in Corporation Dispensary; the first respondent has got promotion in the Railway Hospital without any transfer and is now the Chief Medical Director, under which capacity he admitted more than 100 students for the National Board on monetary consideration and he used to receive huge amounts from the manufacturers and suppliers of medical equipments, medicines and other materials.

5. It is further stated in the affidavit that the first respondent had purchased several bungalows in the State of Tamil Nadu under the names of benami. The petitioner complained the matter to the third respondent on 20.04.2009, but there was no reply. Thereafter, he sent a complaint to the Central Bureau of Investigation, Southern Region, EVK Sampath Building, Chennai, to which, the petitioner was informed that the complaint was forwarded to the Chief Vigilance Officer, Railway Headquarters, Park Town, Chennai, but no action was taken. The first respondent was to retire from service on 012. 2009. Under the circumstances, the petitioner had filed this Writ Petition, in public interest, for the relief stated supra.

6. We have heard the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and also gone through the records.

7. At the outset, it is to be stated that the scope of entertaining a petition styled as a Public Interest Litigation, coupled with the locus standi of the petitioner, particularly, in matters involving service of an employee, has been examined by the Supreme Court in various cases. Court has to be satisfied abou