In the case of Kannan Swaminathan vs. Union of India (W.P. No. 12599 of 2024), the petitioner, Kannan Swaminathan, a Civil Engineer with 20 years of experience, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He sought a direction from the Madras High Court to the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate alleged corruption and criminal misconduct within the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWAD Board) related to the tender process for drinking water supply across Tamil Nadu. The petition was framed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).
Important Legal Issues:
1. Allegations of Corruption: The petitioner alleged that the third respondent, the TWAD Board, did not conduct the tender process transparently, violating the guidelines of the Central National Jal Jeevan Mission and Indian Standard IS 12288-1987, which could endanger public health.
2. Private vs. Public Interest Litigation: A critical issue in this case was determining whether the petition truly served public interest or was motivated by private gains, given that the petitioner’s brother, a contractor, was allegedly ineligible to participate in the tender process.
3. Court’s Concern Over Abuse of PIL: The case brought forth the issue of the increasing misuse of PILs for private interests, which the courts have been vigilant against.
Court’s Decision:
The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice D. Krishnakumar and Justice P.B. Balaji delivered the judgment on August 5, 2024. The court dismissed the writ petition, concluding that it was not a genuine PIL but a private interest litigation. The petitioner was found to be attempting to address a personal grievance under the guise of public interest, as his brother, a registered contractor, had been disqualified from a tender process managed by the TWAD Board.
The court cited the petitioner’s failure to refute the third respondent’s allegations about his vested interests and noted the petitioner’s disruptive behavior during court proceedings. Emphasizing the need to prevent the abuse of PILs, the court imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the petitioner, payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.
Observations of the Court:
The court underscored the importance of maintaining the sanctity of PILs, quoting the Supreme Court’s stance on the matter:
– “Public interest litigation, or PIL, must be used as an effective weapon in the armor of law for delivering social justice to citizens. However, the judiciary must be extremely careful to see that behind the beautiful veil of public interest, an ugly private malice, vested interest, and/or publicity-seeking is not lurking.”
Also Read
Parties Involved:
– Petitioner: Kannan Swaminathan
– Respondents:
– Union of India, represented by the Central Vigilance Commission
– State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption
– Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWAD Board)
Case Representation:
– For the Petitioner: Mr. Thamizhanban
– For the Respondents:
– Mr. R. Muniyapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr. Kishore Kumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for Respondent-2.
– Mrs. S. Mekhala for Respondent-3.
