'Harsh': Supreme Court Reduces Condition Imposed On Public Interest Litigant To Deposit 1% Of Project Cost As Security

The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside an order of the Bombay High Court, requiring a PIL-petitioner to deposit 1% cost of a sewage treatment plan project, estimated to be around Rs. 390 crore, before hearing his case. Instead, the Court directed the Petitioner to deposit Rs. 10 lakh as security to proceed in the matter.

"We understand that the impugned order of the High Court was intended to subserve the interest of ensuring that a public project should not be stalled by filing of frivolous PILs. However, it is equally necessary to ensure that a balance is struck to preclude the possibility of denial of access to Justice," a Division Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah observed.

The Bombay High Court had asked the Petitioner, Arvind Tukaram Shinde, to deposit 1% of the project cost by July 5, 2021. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner had moved the Top Court with a grievance that it would place an unbearable burden on him. The Petitioner urged that the High Court order would effectively preclude him from pursuing his challenge on merits.

Significantly, the impugned order was passed in exercise of powers under Rule 7A of the Bombay High Court PIL Rules 2010. It provides that the Court may, in its discretion, direct the petitioner to deposit a sum, by way of security deposit, in the Court, which shall be subject to final or interim order of the Court and If the Court finds that petition is vexatious, motivated or not pro-bono-publico, then the amount so deposited shall be forfeited.

The Top Court opined that the purpose of incorporation of such a provision is to ensure that public projects are not dislocated by institution of motivated PILs. However, a balance has to be maintained to ensure that access to justice is not denied. "Imposition of 1% project cost is rather harsh," the Bench remarked.

Accordingly, the Top Court made absolute its order dated July 19, directing the Petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 10 lakh before the High Court Registry. As the Petitioner informed the Court that the said sum has already been deposited, the Bench set aside the impugned order dated June 30 and directed that the PIL can be heard on the basis of 10 lakh deposit.

"It will be open to Petitioner to the move High Court for listing for admission," the Court ordered.

Advocate Vipin Nair argued for the petitioner.

Case Title: Arvind Tukaram Shinde v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Click Here To Download the Order