New Delhi: The Supreme Court has frowned on the practice of filing public interest litigation (PIL) petitions for personal interest. "Easy access to justice should not be misused as a licence to file misconceived and frivolous petitions," said a Bench consisting of Justices Arijit Pasayat and S.H. Kapadia.

The time had come to weed out petitions which, though titled PIL, were in essence something else. It was shocking that courts were flooded with a large number of the so-called PIL petitions, of which even a minuscule percentage could not legitimately be called PIL.

Writing the judgment, Justice Pasayat said "though the parameters of PIL have been indicated by this court in a large number of cases, unmindful of the real intentions and objectives, High Courts are entertaining such petitions and wasting valuable judicial time which could otherwise be utilised for disposal of genuine cases."

In the PIL, official documents were being annexed without even indicating how the petitioner came to possess them, the Bench said. "It is depressing to note that on account of such trumpery proceedings initiated before the courts, innumerable days are wasted."

Laudable concept

The judges said "We spare no effort in fostering and developing the laudable concept of PIL and extending our long arm of sympathy to the poor, the ignorant, the oppressed and the needy whose fundamental rights are infringed and violated and whose grievances go unnoticed, un-represented and unheard."

The Bench said: "While [there are] genuine litigants with legitimate grievances relating to civil matters involving properties worth hundreds of millions of rupees and substantial rights and criminal cases in which persons sentenced to death facing the gallows under untold agony and persons sentenced to life imprisonment and kept in incarceration for long years with the fond hope of getting into the courts and having their grievances redressed, the busybodies, meddlesome interlopers, wayfarers or officious interveners having absolutely no real public interest except personal gain or private profit get into courts by filing vexatious and frivolous petitions."

The Bench said: "PIL 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. The attractive brand of PIL should not be allowed to be used for suspicious products of mischief." It should be aimed at redress of a genuine public wrong or injury and should not be not publicity-oriented or founded on personal vendetta.

"The court must not allow its process to be abused for oblique considerations by masked phantoms who monitor at times from behind. Often they are actuated by a desire to win notoriety or cheap popularity. The petitions of such busybodies deserve to be thrown out by rejection on the threshold, and in appropriate cases with exemplary costs."

The Bench, in the instant case, allowed an appeal from an affected employee against a Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment entertaining a PIL petition in a service matter.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail