Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL For Excavation Of And Preservation Of Buddhist 'Remains' Allegedly Unearthed From Ram Janmabhoomi Campus [Read Order]

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday dismissed a PIL seeking a direction to preserve the "remains" whatever found at the site of proposed "Ram Janm Bhoomi Mandir Campus" Ayodhya during the leveling of the said site.

On the basis of a news item published in the daily 'Hindustan' on 21st May, 2020, it was submitted before the Division Bench that the petitioners came to know that during the digging work at the site "Ram Janam Bhoomi" Ayodhya, some old temples, relating to Buddha, were found. And, therefore, the petitioners, who are 'Bouddh Bhikshu' and followers of Buddhism, have filed the PIL for issuance of appropriate direction to the Archaeological Department to decide their representation and keep remains before the appropriate site of the Archaeological Department.

The petitioners prayed for the Court to command the respondents to excavate the whole site of "Ram Janm Bhoomi Mandir Campus" in proper manner so that the possible remains lying under the earth of the said site may be discovered/unearthed in the national interest/in the interest of justice and if such remains are found further, the same may also be preserved.

"The law in respect of a news item has been decided by this Court vide judgment and order dated 26th August, 2019 passed in PIL Civil No.22649 of 2019 'Mahant Bhagwati Pratap Das Vs. Chancellor, KGMU, Lucknow and others'. On the basis of aforesaid, no PIL can be entertained. Secondly, detail particulars have not been given by the petitioners regarding the representation made before the Archaeological Survey of India", noted the bench.

In the aforesaid decision, the court had held that any averments made in a writ petition, based on newspaper reports which are without any basis and unaccompanied by any proof, have no value at all.

"Considering the aforesaid, we are not inclined to entertain this public interest litigation petition in view of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal and others, reported in (2010) 3 SCC 402 as there is no compliance of Sub-Rule 3-A of Rule 1 of Chapter XXII of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952", stated the bench, in dismissing the PIL.

In the case of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal, the Supreme Court had reflected that courts are frequently abused in the name of PIL and had directed all High Courts to frame rules to prevent its misuse.

Accordingly, the Allahabad High Court Rules were amended to insert a Sub Rule 3-A in Rule 1 of Chapter 22, making it mandatory for a petitioner seeking to file a PIL, to file a detailed affidavit.

In the affidavit, the petitioner is required to state the reasons for filing the PIL, his credentials and the public cause to be served by it. The petitioner will have to show that he has no personal or private interest in filing the PIL and that there is no authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court or High Court on the questions raised in the PIL.

Click Here To Download Order

[Read Order]