HARJIT SINGH BEDI, J. - (1.) THIS Public Interest Litigation has been pending at the motion stage since 2003. The prayer of the petitioner is that equipment worth Rs. 2.77 crores had been purchased by the Computer and Wireless Wing of the Punjab Police in the years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 from M/s. Surya Telecom by respondent Nos. 6 to 8 ignoring all norms and procedures causing a huge loss to the Government, a matter which needed to be investigated. It has been alleged that M/s. Surya Telecom was a company which was being controlled by a person with a dubious background and he had connived with some of the respondents to engineer the supply of substandard equipment to the police.
(2.) WHILE the matter had been pending in this Court, notice had also been issued to Mr. Rajan Gupta, the learned counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation and he too has been appearing in these proceedings. A committee of experts was also set up by the Court, which has submitted a report of a very highly technical nature. An in-house enquiry was also conducted by Shri R.K. Gupta, A.D.G.P. and it is the case of the petitioners that this enquiry had been rushed through with the intention of stalling the present proceedings and as such no sanctity could be attached to its findings, which were even otherwise vague and intended to bail out those who were involved in the purchases. On 19.9.2003 this Court had recorded the following order :- "Mr. R.S. Bains, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners hands over to us and Mr. A.G. Masih, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, Xerox copy of an alleged letter bearing No. 1449/PS/DGP dated, Chandigarh, the 17.9.2003 to The Principal Secretary Home, Govt. of Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, pertaining to this writ petition recommending that "with the view to ensure fair play, equity and justice, it is recommended that the entire matter, pertaining to the purchase of wireless sets for 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 be handed over to C.B.I. or to any other independent agency for enquiry." Mr. A.G. Masih, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab comes up with a prayer for adjournment to verify the genuineness of the document aforementioned. Except indicating as to how a confidential document has reached the petitioner apparently breaching provisions of Section 5 of the Indian Official Secrets Act is an aspect which is required to be considered by the D.G.P., Punjab and/or the Chief Secretary, Punjab and not for us to make comments in that regard. The document is being kept on record. Adjourned to 23.10.2003. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. A.G. Masih, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab in course of the day for its intimation to and follow up action. We too have perused the letter dated 17.9.2003 and for emphasis we reiterate its recommendations which are :- "With the view to ensure fair play, equity and justice, it is recommended that the entire matter, pertaining to the purchase of wireless sets for 2000-2001, 2002-2002 and 2002-2003 be handed over to CBI or to any other independent agency for enquiry."
(3.) MR . Sarin, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 has pointed out that from the documents on record including the letter dated 17.9.2002 and the pleadings inter se the respondents themselves wherein allegations/counter-allegations had been levelled, it was clear that the entire matter had been initiated on account of service rivalry and as such this litigation was not maintainable. In support of this submission, he has placed reliance on State of Karnataka v. Arun Kumar Agarwal and others, 2000(1) SCC 210; Dr. B. Singh v. Union of India and others, JT 2004(3) SC 127; N.K. Prasada v. Government of India and others, 2004(6) Supreme Court Cases 299 and Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware v. State of Maharashtra and others, 2005(1) RCR(Civil) 231 : JT 2004(10) SC 561.;