In public interest litigation, a petitioner must demonstrate bona fide intent and sufficient interest, avoiding vexatious claims; the court may intervene if allegations of public fund misuse are substantiated even when the government is reviewing them.

ORDER

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J. - This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner making allegations of misuse and defalcation of public funds during implementation of various health schemes by the State officials and others which has been registered as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).

2. The basic facts and controversy brought before this Court are as follows:

From newspaper reports and the report of internal audit conducted by the Senior Audit Officer of the State Directorate of Audit for the period from 01.04.2006 to 31.03.2015 and from various other documents supplied to the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005, petitioner came to know that various irregularities were committed and huge amount of fund was misused and defalcated by the officers involved in the implementation of ASHA training and various other health schemes across the State. Seeking intervention of Court, petitioner has filed this public interest petition and sought for the following directions:

(i) To call for the relevant records from the custody of the State respondents.

(ii) To issue direction to the State respondents to initiate departmental proceedings against all Government officials who were found involved in the scam and recover the defalcated amount of money from the delinquent officials in terms of the audit report submitted by the State Audit Directorate.

(iii) To cancel re-employment given to some of the delinquent officials.

3. By filing counter affidavit sworn by the Under Secretary to the Government of Tripura in the Health and Family Welfare Department, the State respondents have contended that some discrepancies are reported by the Audit Directorate in their report which is under the scrutiny of the State Government. In the process of scrutiny, reports have been called for from various Primary Health Centre (PHC), Community Health Centre (CHC) and other officials involved in the implementation of various health schemes including Janani Suraksha Yojana and ASHA training programme. With regard to re-employment of retired medical officers and other Government officials, it has been contended by the State respondents in their counter affidavit that in view of the shortage of medical officers in various hospitals and health centres across the State, the State Government has re-employed some of the retired medical officers who were found physically fit to continue beyond retirement.

4. Heard Mr. A. Debbarma, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. GA appearing for the State respondents.

5. Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that gross misuse of public money has been reported by the Directorate of Audit, Government of Tripura in their internal audit report dated 18.01.2016. The State Government has not taken adequate actions against the erring officials involved in the scam. Counsel, therefore, urges the Court for issuing directions to the State authorities to book the offenders and take punitive measures against them.

6. Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. GA appearing for the State respondents on the other hand contends that petitioner has no locus standi to file this public interest petition. The State counsel further contends that the audit report is under the scrutiny of the State Government and pursuant to the report, the State Government will take required corrective measures. It is further contended by Mr. Debbarma, learned State counsel that the petitioner has filed this petition with mala fide intention and oblique consideration. Learned State counsel, therefore, ur