A retired employee cannot maintain a private interest in a case regarding university property, establishing criteria for Public Interest Litigation.

1. When this Writ Petition was moved, this Court ascertained from the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as to how the instant Writ Petition can be maintained, except as a Public Interest Litigation (P.I.L). Learned Senior Counsel would reply that the affidavit preferred by the petitioner contains an element of public interest, in his capacity as an ex - employee of the Kerala University. The subject matter of challenge is an assignment proposed by the University in favour of the 5th respondent.

2. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and having perused the records, this Court is of the opinion that this Writ Petition is not maintainable, except as a P.I.L. The contention that the petitioner has a private interest in his capacity as a retired employee of the University is too far - fetched and can hardly be countenanced. A retired employee of a University cannot have any private interest, recognisable in law, insofar as assignment of the property of the University is concerned; and his concern, if any, can only partake the character of public interest. The fact that the petitioner is drawing pension from the University, for that matter from the Government, will not make the petitioner an interested party, so as to oust the maintainability of a P.I.L. Petitioner's affidavit, itself, indicates that the present litigation is public in nature and not to vindicate any private grievance of the petitioner.
In the circumstances, the Registry is directed to place the matter before the court dealing with Public Interest Litigations.