- (1.) Public Interest Litigation has been instituted mainly for the following prayers:-- That in the instant application filed by way of public interest litigation, the petitioner prays for issuance of appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) for initiation of a comprehensive investigation by an independent agency preferably by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the mala fide role of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in the lawlessness that is prevailing in the campus of National Institute of Technology (NIT), Jamshedpur and the complete breakdown of administration of N.I.T which is the result of illegal appointment of teachers in NIT, financial irregularities increasing suicidal tendencies and suicides among the students. Unilateral decisions making process adopted by Respondent No. 3 in almost all the matters academic or administrative, non-initiation of any maintenance work in the premises of the institute and the indifferent attitude towards the well-being of the students to the growth of academic values and excellence of NIT. Further prays issuance of appropriate orders declaring the appointment of Respondent No. 3 to the post of Director, NIT, Jamshedpur is in violation of the process of appointment as prescribed in the National Institute of Technology Act, 2007 and accordingly prays for issuance of direction(s) to the concerned authority to remove him from his post. Further prays for passing such other writ(s), order(s), direction(s) for doing conscionable and equitable justice to the petitioner. For the aforesaid prayers, the petition was instituted with several detailed averments, allegations, photographs etc.
(2.) Initially this writ petition was not entertained as Public Interest Litigation and therefore, vide order dated 2nd April, 2012 counsel for the petitioner was replaced by appointing Amicus Curiae, mainly for the reasons that private interest was also involved in this petition and therefore, to circumvent this type of private interest litigation, this writ petition was treated as Public Interest Litigation, by appointing Amicus Curiae.
(3.) The Amicus Curiae, who was appointed to assist this Court, has submitted that vide Order No. 8 dated 7th August, 2012, passed by this Court, direction was given to constitute an expert Committee to enquire into the allegation and counter allegation. Thereafter, final report of the said Committee was tendered to this Court, which runs into more than 750 pages approximately and alongwith affidavits and counter affidavits in this writ petition, total pages are more than 1000 pages, which has been highlighted in the report by the Amicus Curiae, in detail, who has submitted that at page No. 7 of the said report, the issues involved in this writ petition have been crystallized by the Committee and the sub-headings have also been given and for each and every issues, separate discussion and conclusion have been drawn by the said Committee. The learned Amicus Curiae has also read over each and every issue, involved in this writ petition and the recommendations made by the said Committee.;