HC rejects writ plea as petitioner unconditionally withdrew PIL having same grievance w.r.t. violation of SEBI

Case details: India Awake For Transparency v. Chairman Securities & Exchange Board of India - [2021] 128 taxmann.com 5 (Karnataka)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • P.S. Dinesh Kumar, J.
  • R. Subramanian, Adv. for the petitioner.
  • S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. and Sandeep Huilgol, Adv. for the Respondent

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Petitioner had filed public interest litigation with a prayer inter alia for a writ of mandamus and to direct the respondent-SEBI to constitute a multi-disciplinary investigation team to investigate offenses alleged to have been committed by ‘A’ and his associates.

The Petitioner filed an instant writ petition against four respondents for directions against SEBI to take up investigation for violation of provisions under the SEBI Act by the respondents in three transactions set out in information and to prosecute.

The SEBI submitted that prayers made in both PIL as also writ petition were one and same so far as an investigation by the SEBI was concerned and the petitioner had unconditionally withdrawn PIL and, therefore, an instant writ petition was not maintainable on the ground of res judicata.

It was observed that a careful perusal of representations annexed to PIL and instant writ petition showed that the grievance of petitioner was one and same so far as violation of provisions of SEBI Act and Regulations were concerned.

High Court Held

The High Court held that since the petitioner had withdrawn PIL unconditionally, therefore, an instant writ petition could not be entertained, and accordingly, dismissed the writ petition.

Case Review

• • Sarjuya Transport Services v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwaliar [1987] 1 SCC 5 (para 20) followed.

List of Cases Referred to

• • Sheo Nandan Paswan v. State of Bihar [1987] 1 SCC 288 (para 4)
  • Sarjuya Transport Service v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwaliar [1987] 1 SCC 5 (para 18).