The Hindu : New Delhi News : “Frivolous government litigation clogs wheels of justice”

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Nov 13, 2009
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

New Delhi

New Delhi

“Frivolous government litigation clogs wheels of justice”

Legal Correspondent

Statutory authorities should be responsible litigants: Supreme Court

Officers reluctant to take decisions for fear of accusations of wrong decision-making
Unless insecurity is addressed, they will continue to pass on responsibility to courts

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the increase of frivolous and unjust litigation by the Central and State governments, thereby clogging the wheels of justice.

“Statutory authorities exist to discharge statutory functions in the public interest. They should be responsible litigants. They cannot raise frivolous and unjust objections, nor act in a callous and highhanded manner. They cannot behave like some private litigants with profiteering motives. Nor can they resort to unjust enrichment,” said a Bench of Justices R.V. Raveendran and G.S. Singhvi.

Baseless assumptions

Writing the order, Justice Raveendran said: “Unwarranted litigation by governments and statutory authorities basically stems from two general baseless assumptions by their officers — all claims should be viewed as illegal and should be resisted and fought up to the highest court; if taking a decision on an issue could be avoided, then it is prudent not to decide and let the aggrieved party approach the court and secure a decision.”

The Bench said: “The reluctance to take decisions, or the tendency to challenge all orders against them, is not the policy of the governments or statutory officers, but is attributable to some officers who are responsible for taking decisions and/or officers in charge of litigation. Their reluctance arises from an instinctive tendency to protect themselves against any future accusations of wrong decision-making, or worse, of improper motives for any decision making.”

The Bench said: “Unless their insecurity and fear is addressed, officers will continue to pass on the responsibility of decision-making to courts and tribunals. The Centre is now attempting to deal with this issue by formulating realistic and practical norms for defending cases filed against the government and for filing appeals and revisions against adverse decisions, thereby eliminating unnecessary litigation.”

“States must make genuine efforts”

The court said: “It is not sufficient that the Centre alone undertakes such an exercise. The State governments and statutory authorities who had more litigation than the Centre should also make genuine efforts to eliminate litigation. Vexatious and unnecessary litigation has been clogging the wheels of justice for too long, making it difficult for courts and tribunals to provide easy and speedy access to justice to bona fide and needy litigants.”

The Bench said: “They [the authorities] are expected to show remorse or regret when their officers act negligently or in an overbearing manner. When glaring wrong acts by their officers are brought to their notice, for which there is no explanation or excuse, the least that is expected is restitution/restoration to the extent possible, with appropriate compensation.” Their harsh attitude to genuine grievances of the public and their indulging in unwarranted litigation required to be corrected.

In the instant case, the Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner, filed an appeal against an order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission upholding the Rajasthan Commission’s direction for providing an alternative plot to Mohan Lal, whose plot allotted in 1998 was converted into a road without notice.

The Bench, while dismissing the appeal, pointed out that the State Commission granted a minimum relief of allotment of an alternative plot with a compensation of Rs. 5,000. But, instead of complying with the order, the Trust approached the National Commission and this court.

The Trust should sensitise its officers to serving the public rather than justify their dictatorial acts, and avoid such unnecessary litigation, the Bench said.

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

New Delhi