JUDGMENT DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ. - The present petition has been filed purportedly in public interest by the petitioner who claims to have been previously elected as a councillor, Tadepalligudem Municipality and claims to have the knowledge as regards the method in which the municipal general funds are to be utilised for the welfare of its residents. 1.1. The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the decision of laying down of a cement concrete road in between the agricultural lands in a non-residential area allegedly only for the benefit of private respondent No.8 - who is a Minister in the present Government, and his family members, abutting their agricultural lands situate in survey Nos.39/1, 43, 43-A, 43/4A, 44/1B, 44/2B and 44/3 in Kadakatla, Tadepalligudem. The petitioner claims that instead the road ought to have been constructed in the residential areas where there are houses within the Municipalities. 2. The petitioner also has annexed the site plan with the writ petition which shows that the proposed road although cuts across agricultural lands on either side, yet abutting the agricultural lands exists the National Institute of Technology, which also has a gate opening towards the proposed road. Not only this, there is a RTC complex at the end of the proposed road which joins with the RTC depot road and finally merges in the KN road on the one side and the National Highway on the other side. In fact, from the map it is clear that, the proposed road would provide free access to commuters and would connect KN road to the National Highway and serve not only the students and faculty of the National Institute of Technology, who are numbering 1200, according to the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner, but would also link the RTC depot road and the Aerodrome road to the National Highway. 3. The fact that some land belonging to respondent No.8 and his close family members abuts the proposed road, therefore, in our opinion, can be no justification for holding that the construction of the said road was against public interest. The present petition, to us, appears to be filed more out of political motive, rather than serving any genuine public interest. 4. The present petition, to us, appears to be filed more out of political motive, rather than serving any genuine public interest. 4. In fact, counsel for respondent No.8, with a view to show political motives of the petitioner drew our attention, to yet another PIL bearing number W.P.(PIL).No.117 of 2023, wherein respondent No.8 herein figures as respondent No.10 in the said PIL. 4.1. Reference in this regard was made to an order passed by this Court on 18/10/2023, passed in W.P. (PIL).No.117 of 2023, wherein the proceedings as against the said respondent No.8 herein along with few others, had been closed. It was therefore, sought to be urged that the petitioner in the guise of public interest had repeatedly been attacking the said respondent No.8, only to serve his political agenda and motives. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. The Courts have repeatedly been sensitive to the fact that PILs had to be admitted with great care and caution and that the same ought to be entertained only with a view to prevent genuine public wrong or public injury and not for achieving any private agenda or serve any political motive and also noticed with pain that, the PIL jurisdiction which had been so carefully carved out, created and nurtured with care and caution by courts was being blatantly abused by filing petitions with oblique motives. Apex Court therefore, held in State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufa, 2010 (3) SCC 402 . and others1 that time had come to impose exemplary costs as deterrent, against frivolous and vexatious Public Interest Litigations to ensure that, message goes in the right direction that petitions filed with oblique motives do not have the approval of the Courts. 7. Reference is also apt to the judgment of the Apex Court in the Holicow Pictures Pvt. Ltd. vs. Prem Chandra Mishra & Others, 2007 (14) SCC 281 . where it held: "10...13. Public interest litigation is a weapon which has to be used with great care and circumspection and the judiciary has to be extremely careful to see that behind the beautiful veil of public interest an ugly private malice, vested interest and/or publicity seeking is not lurking. It is to be used as an effective weapon in the armoury of law for delivering social justice to the citizens. It is to be used as an effective weapon in the armoury of law for delivering social justice to the citizens. The attractive brand name of public interest litigation should not be used for suspicious products of mischief. It should be aimed at redressal of genuine public wrong or public injury and not publicity oriented or founded on personal vendetta... 14... 15. The Court has to be satisfied about (a) the credentials of the applicant; (b) the prima facie correctness or nature of information given by him; (c) the information being not vague and indefinite. The information should show gravity and seriousness involved. Court has to strike balance between two conflicting interests; (i) nobody should be allowed to indulge in wild and reckless allegations besmirching the character of others; and (ii) avoidance of public mischief and to avoid mischievous petitions seeking to assail, for oblique motives, justifiable executive actions. In such case, however, the Court cannot afford to be liberal. It has to be extremely careful to see that under the guise of redressing a public grievance, it does not encroach upon the sphere reserved by the Constitution to the Executive and the Legislature. The Court has to act ruthlessly while dealing with imposters and busybodies or meddlesome interlopers impersonating as publicspirited holy men. They masquerade as crusaders of justice. They pretend to act in the name of Pro Bono Publico, though they have no interest of the public or even of their own to protect." 8. Testing the facts of the present case on the touchstone of the ratio of the aforementioned judgments, it clearly appears, to us, to be a petition filed by the petitioner to serve only his political agenda. It is not denied that the petitioner is also a person with a political background and so is respondent No.8, who is currently holding the Office of the Minister for Endowments Department and is also an elected member from Tadepalligudem Assembly Constituency. As to why, should a road at all have been constructed, which would benefit also the respondent No.8, appears to be the aim and object of the petitioner in the present petition. 9. From the tone and tenor of the averments made in the writ petition, it can be seen that the benefit which others would get from the road being made a cement concrete road has been not clearly discussed or highlighted. 9. From the tone and tenor of the averments made in the writ petition, it can be seen that the benefit which others would get from the road being made a cement concrete road has been not clearly discussed or highlighted. It is not denied that there already exists a road which is now sought to be improved by laying of cement concrete over it. 9.1 The petitioner totally ignored the fact that approximately 1200 students of National Institute of Technology, which is in close proximity to the agricultural land mentioned in the writ petition, would also stand benefitted by the improvement of the road and would connect the KN road and Aerodrome road with the National Highway. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the present petition is not filed in genuine public interest but for oblique purposes. 10.1 We, therefore, do not find any merit in the present petition and dismiss the same with costs of Rs.50, 000.00 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to be deposited in the Advocates' Welfare Fund, by the petitioner, within a period of four (4) weeks from today. The matter shall be listed for compliance before this Court on 3/1/2024 only for purposes of ensuring that the amount imposed as costs is deposited. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.