Lawyer Blames 'Technical Glitch' For Dismissal Of PIL, Delhi High Court Says 'Allegation Strange, VC Facility Being Misused'

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday expressed displeasure at a lawyer, who took a "somersault" in a public interest litigation (PIL) when he blamed "technical glitch" for a previously-recorded submission that he wants to withdraw the case.

The petition against Delhi government's decision to disaffiliate the college from Delhi University and merge it with the Ambedkar University, was dismissed as withdrawn on September 19 after the lawyer, who then appeared through the VC, said he wants to withdraw the case.

The plea was accordingly 'dismissed as withdrawn' by the bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad. Before withdrawal of the case, the court was not inclined to issue notice on the plea.

The bench had accordingly passed following the order:

"At the outset, the Petitioner, who is appearing in person, through video conferencing, prays for withdrawal of the instant PIL. Permission, as prayed for, is granted."

However, the lawyer this week moved an application seeking recall of the order dated September 19, claiming that his submission of withdrawing the PIL was recorded on account of a technical glitch. He accordingly prayed that the plea be restored.

During the course of hearing today, the bench noted that neither the petitioner wanted admission in the college in question nor was he connected with it, either as a student or as a teacher.

Further observing that the petitioner was "taking a somersault" from his earlier stand, the court observed:

"It is really unfortunate that the VC facility extended to the members of the bar is being misused as reflected from the application filed by the petitioner by making a vague and strange allegation. While appearing through VC, the petitioner had made a categorical statement which was reduced in writing in the order. We find no reason to recall the order passed earlier. The application is dismissed."

As the bench refused to grant liberty to the petitioner for filing of a fresh plea, Chief Justice Sharma orally told the lawyer "People are waiting for the last 15 years…..how is it public interest? If you want to do public interest…help those who are sitting in front of AIIMS, provide them food, provide them medicine, do some good job, not this."

The PIL claimed that the petitioner was informed by the students that they are being denied admission in College of Arts for the academic session 2021-2022.

While the merger is under process, the PIL stated that there was an apprehension that the already enrolled students and faculty of College of Arts would not be provided equal and similar benefits in Dr. B.R.Ambedkar University, Delhi.

"Because the proposed merger is nothing but to satisfy the mediocre ego and fake statement of Chief Minister of Delhi that they will establish new universities/ institutions on the pretext of this they are merely renaming or merging institutes like College of Art," the plea argued.

Title: Rahul Thakur v. Lt. Governor, GNCTD & Ors.