MPSC scam: Bombay HC slaps Rs50,000 cost on NGO for 'motivated' PIL

Dismissing the public interest litigation (PIL) against the investigation officer (IO) of the 2001 Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) answer paper scam after terming it as "motivated", the Bombay High Court slapped a fine of Rs50,000 on the NGO, National Amnesty and Redemption Organisation.

A division bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice KK Tated dismissed the PIL and directed the cost be recovered from the NGO’s president, Deepak Kavetkar. The amount is to be deposited in the state treasury for the police department. The state government has been asked to file a compliance report with the court.

The NGO had filed the PIL alleging that the investigation officer, Sudhakar Pujari, had underworld links and sought action against him.

However, the court clarified that they were not going into the merit of the case. "At the same time we place on record, the rejection of the PIL is not expression of opinion on the merits of the pending departmental inquiry against Pujari."

Further, the court also took note of the fact that Dr BS Kadam, one of the accused in the MPSC scam, was instructing the NGO. Also, the president of the NGO had several cognisable offences registered against him.

"It will be preposterous to entertain the PIL at the instance of such persons alleging acts of commission and omission of the police officer who investigated the MPSC examination scam," observed the court.

The court added that several high ranking officials have inquired into the allegations against Pujari at the appropriate level. The court expressed satisfaction that the October 2004 inquiry stated that no material was there to indicate involvement of Pujari (with the underworld).

"Subtle attempt of petitioners is to keep accusation against Pujari pending for reasons best known to them. That would invariably help the accused in the MPSC scam. Any observation made with regard to the factual matrix referred to the present petition would inevitably help the accused named in the offence," observed the court.

The court added, "We are convinced that the petition is subterfuge and an attempt to create gloss in the guise of PIL by using the screen of NGO."