PIL alleged corruption in awarding road contract by Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation
In a first of its kind case, the Bombay high court recently refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a former employee of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation. Prakash Kukreja, the former employee, sought directions against its employer, alleging corruption in road contracts.
Kukreja accordingly withdrew his petition failing to adhere to the court's suggestion to deposit Rs1 lakh before the hearing to prove he is bona fide.
A division bench of justices VA Naik and MR Bhatkar said, "Why did you not make grievance when you were in service? Then you kept mum and after retirement you have come to court; we will not entertain such petitions."
The observations were made during the hearing of a PIL by Kukreja, who held important posts like deputy commissioner (Octroi), deputy commissioner (LBT) and law officer in the civic body. After retirement, he started practising law.
In his petition, Kukreja alleged the corporation had been awarding road maintenance contracts to Jai Bharat Construction Company only and that it was because of the collusion of municipal officers with the company and its political connections. Furthermore, it also alleged that this led to bad roads in Ulhasnagar.
The petition prayed that the high court order an inquiry into all the contracts awarded to the company, appoint a standing advisory committee to advise the corporation about the various problems of maintenance and upkeep of roads and direct the civic body to compulsorily adopt e-tendering process to root out corruption.
Kukreja, through his advocate, informed the court that he was associated with several other social initiatives and had filed other petitions in the high court highlighting public issues. To this, the court said: "You may have taken up other causes; we also would have otherwise heard the petition if it was highlighting another public cause, but not this."
Then the bench asked Kukreja to deposit a sum of Rs1 lakh with the high court registry to prove he is bona fide. It said, "This is a general practice in the Nagpur and Aurangabad bench of the high court; here also it can be adopted." Failing this, Kukreja withdrew the petition and sought liberty to file a fresh petition seeking directions to the corporation to maintain the public roads in Ulhasnagar and also seek some ancillary relief. This was allowed by the court.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}