Lawyers Filing PILs Need To Show Antecedents, Merely Being A Lawyer Not Enough: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court on Thursday dismissreiterated that merely being a lawyer will not suffice and a petitioner in a public interest litigation must file his/her antecedents.

"You need to give your credentials. Merely being an advocate is not enough, are you really a public spirited person? Are you registered with legal services? Have you taken mediation classes? The problem is that you people don't study the law. Have you studied Balwant Singh Chaufal? What are the guidelines?" remarked the Bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti.

In State of Uttranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal (2010), the Supreme Court held that a petitioner seeking to file a PIL should precisely and specifically state in the affidavit to be sworn by him giving his credentials, that he has no personal or private interest in the matter.

The bench showed displeasure at two public interest litigations, both of which the Bench opined had civil remedies. One was a land dispute whereas the other was to ensure that biometric system was followed in law schools.

The Bench said the genesis and vision of PIL jurisdiction to provide a remedy to a society at large who are unable to approach the Court. It criticized the lawyers for invoking the powers of public interest for frivolous causes.

"If your client is really aggrieved, you file a Civil Suit. It is the duty of a public spirited individual to give right advice. Don't invite our comments. This is all performa, is this not a civil dispute?" it remarked and asked the lawyers to approach appropriate authorities for the enforcement of their rights.