ALL SIKKIM YOUTH ASSOCIATION & ANOTHER versus H.R. SUBBA & OTHERS

Citation: [2010] 13 S.C.R. 345 · Decided: 08-10-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DALVEER BHANDARI · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 345 
ALL SIKKIM YOUTH ASSOCIATION & ANOTHER 
v. 
H.R. SUBBA & OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 1834 of 2002) 
OCTOBER 8, 2010 
[DALVEER BHANDARI AND DEEPAK VERMA, JJ.) 
A 
B 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Public Interest 
Litigation - Filed on the basis of news items published in News 
Papers - Alleging grave irregularities in Public Works C 
Department (Roads and Bridges) - On the basis of Report 
of the Finance Department of the State also alleging 
misappropriation of public exchequer by certain officials of the 
Department - Prayer made for direction of investigation into 
the case by CBI or eve - High Court dismissing the petition 
D 
- On appeal, held: Judgment of the High Court does not call 
for interference - The Inspection team, on direction of the 
High Court did not find any misappropriation of funds - No 
breach of Sikkim Financial Rules found - Sikkim Financial 
Rules, 1979 - Sikkim Public Works Code, 2009. 
E 
The appellant-Association filed a writ petition in 
public interest in the High Court. It was stated that the 
Public Works Department (Roads and Bridges) of Sikkim 
had submitted a report to the Finance Commission, 
showing a financial liability of more than 60 crores and 
after investigation into the matter by a Committee formed 
F 
by the Chief Minister, the liabilities came down to 40 
crores from 60 crores. It was alleged that there were 
grave irregularities in the Public Works Department 
(PWD) in repair of roads and bridges. The allegations were 
G 
based on news items and articles published in various 
news papers. It was also alleged that on verification of 
cash-books and other relevant records of the PWD, Road 
345 
H 
346 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A and Bridges Department, it was found that a sum 
exceeding Rs. 3.41 crores was outstanding against 
certain departmental officials as on 29.2.2000. The names 
of the officials were mentioned in the writ petition. It was 
further alleged that despite the report of the Finance 
B Department of the State, recommending for recovery of 
the amount of Rs. 3.41 crores, no action was taken for 
the recovery and neither any criminal nor disciplinary 
action was taken against the erring officials; that most of 
the officials had acquired assets disproportionate to their 
c known sources of income. It was prayed that directions 
be issued for investigation by a competent investigating 
agency such as Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or 
the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to investigate 
into the acts of commission or omission of the officials 
0 
mentioned in the report of the Finance Department; and 
also for recovery of the amount. In defence of the case, 
it was submitted that the allegations of misappropriation 
against the officials was incorrect and the relief sought 
in that regard was misconceived, ma/a fide and motivated. 
E The High Ccurt, dismissing the petition, held that it was 
not necessary to refer the matter for investigation to CBI 
or CVC. Therefore, the instant appeal was filed. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
F 
HELD: In the facts of the instant case, no interference 
is called for. The inspection team, on the direction of the 
High Court, had thoroughly examined the entire matter 
and did not find any misappropriation of funds. Before 
the High Court, the Chief Secretary and the Finance 
G Secretary had filed affidavits and gave details of the entire 
expenditure of Rs.3,40,57,582/-, and liability of the only 
unidentified amount of Rs.32,990/- could not be 
established against any person. The appellants could not 
point out any breach of the Sikkim Financial Rules, 1979 
or misappropriation of funds by the respondents. The 
H 
ALL SIKKIM YOUTH ASSOCIATION & ANR. v. H.R. 
347 
SUBBA & ORS. 
Government of Sikkim, Roads and Bridges Department A 
had revised the Code and now Sikkim Public Works 
Code, 2009 has been introduced, wherein greater 
transparency has been introduced. (Paras 24, 28, 29, 30, 
32 and 33] (356-B; 355-D; 356-D-F; 357-F-G] 
B 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
1834 of 2002. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 19.10.2001 of the High 
Court of Sikkim at Gangtok in Civil Writ Petition No. 17 of 2001. 
K. Swami, Prabha Swami for the Appellants. 
J.L. Gupta, Harish Chandra, A. Mariarputham, Annam D.N. 
c 
Rao, Neelam Jain, Shweta Verma, A.K. Sharma (for P. 
Parmeswaran), Aruna Mathur (for Arputham, Aruna & Co.), 0 
Ashok Mathur for the Re

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.