The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for public interest litigants to inspire confidence in the courts and the public, as well as the importance of effective implementation of schemes such as the High Security Registration Plates (HSRP) scheme.

AFTAB H. SAIKIA, C. J.

( 1 ) HEARD Mrs. Laxmi Chakraborty, learned counsel representing the petitioner and Mr. Karma Thinlay, learned State Counsel representing the official respondents as well as Mr. Bhaskar Raj pradhan, learned counsel assisted by Miss yangchen D. Gyatso, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3.

( 2 ) THIS writ petition filed by the All India private Vehicle Owenrs Association, being the petitioner, has been accepted as a Public Interest Litigation (for short. 'pil' ). The basic and moot grievance of the petitioner herein is that the members of the petitioner, being private vehicle owners, have been burdened with a payment of huge and heavy amount to the tune of Rs. 1600/- per pair for High Security registration Plates (for short, 'hsrp'), the supply of which has been allotted to Respondent No. 3, i. e. M/s. Tonnjes Eastern Security technologies Private Limited, having its registered office at 21-B Vatsa House, Janma bhoomi Marg, Fort Mumbai, Maharashtra, whereas the private vehicle owners of the other States have only to pay for HSRP in between a range of Rs. 500/- to Rs. 900/- and hence it is an act of glaring discrimination and patent arbitrariness on the part of the State of sikkim. Even imposition of such heavy burden in payment of price for HSRP is not permissible and highly prejudicial. It is contended that the respondents No. 2, State of Sikkim has decided to choose respondent No. 3 as the manufacturer of HSRP on such eligibility conditions and other tender conditions that are highly prejudicial to the public interest which can be substantiated by the fact that HSRPs which are supplied at the price of Rs. 500/- to rs. 900/- approximately in other States, are going to be supplied in the State of Sikkim at a price of Rs. 1600/ -. Under such circumstances, a prayer has been made to quash the notice Inviting Tender for implementation of hsrp's Project (for short, 'nit') and to terminate the letter of intent if any issued in favour of respondent No. 3.

( 3 ) SEEKING such relief in this PIL. the petitioner has made the following prayers including interim relief for stay :-

"6. Interim Relief/stay Application : in light of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant the following interim reliefs in the pendency of the present writ petition : i) Pass any order or direction in the nature of writ restraining the Respondent No. 2 from proceeding any further with the Notice Inviting Tender for the implementation of the hsrp's project in the Respondent State; ii) Pass any order or direction in the nature of writ disqualifying the Respondent No. 3 from seeking its selection by the Respondent no. 2 for the implementation of the project in the Respondent State; iii) Any other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit as per the facts and circumstances of the case. PRAYER in the light of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to -i) Pass any order or direction in the nature of writ quashing the Notice Inviting Tender issued by the Respondent No. 2 and terminate the letter of intent if any issued in favour of the Respondent No. 3; ii) Pass any order or direction in the nature of writ requiring the Respondent No. 2 to issue a free and fair Notice Inviting Tender which does not lay down any artificial barriers in the selection process thereby causing prejudice to the public interest; iii) Any other relief which this Court may deem fit and proper as per the facts and circumstances of the case. And for such act of kindness the appellant as is duty bound shall ever pray. "

( 4 ) ON close scrutiny of the documents/ papers so made available before us in this PIL, we do not find any letter of acceptance or letter of intent which is alleged to have given to the respondent No. 3 by way of allotment of work quashment of which has been primarily sought for in this PIL.

( 5 ) ON point