- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Frivolous PILs Should Be Nipped In...
Frivolous PILs Should Be Nipped In Bud; They Encroach Judicial Time, Stall Development Activities : Supreme Court
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
4 Jun 2022 9:51 AM IST
The Supreme Court has expressed concern at the "mushroom growth" of frivolous Public Interest Litigations, which encroach upon valuable judicial time.Deprecating such practice, a vacation bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Hima Kohli said that unless nipped in bud, such cases will stall developmental activities intended in larger public interest.The bench made the observations...
The Supreme Court has expressed concern at the "mushroom growth" of frivolous Public Interest Litigations, which encroach upon valuable judicial time.
Deprecating such practice, a vacation bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Hima Kohli said that unless nipped in bud, such cases will stall developmental activities intended in larger public interest.
The bench made the observations while dismissing two petitions challenging the development works undertaken by the Odisha Government at the premises of Puri Jagannath Temple for the benefit of devotees.
The bench observed :
"In the recent past, it is noticed that there is mushroom growth of public interest litigations. However, in many of such petitions, there is no public interest involved at all. The petitions are either publicity interest litigations or personal interest litigation. We highly deprecate practice of filing such frivolous petitions. They are nothing but abuse of process of law. They encroach upon a valuable judicial time which could be otherwise utilized for considering genuine issues. It is high time that such soÂcalled public interest litigations are nipped in the bud so that the developmental activities in the larger public interest are not stalled".
In the instant case, the Court noted that the petitions were detrimental to the public interest as they intended to stall the works undertaken by the Government to provide facilities and amenities to devotees.
The bench imposed cost of Rs.1,00,000/Â (Rupees one lakh) each on the petitioners, payable to State of Odisha.
Case Title : Ardhendu Kumar Das vs State of Odisha
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 539
Head notes
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 - Sections 20A, 20C, 20D -The repairs and renovation of the buildings, which are existing and the constructions which are necessary for providing basic facilities like drainage, toilets, water supply and distribution of electricity are kept out of the rigour of requirement of statutory permissions - Para 51
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 - Sections 20A, 20C, 20D -When subÂsection (4) of Section 20A of the said Act is read in harmony with clause (dc) of Section 2 and the provisions of Sections 20C and 20D of the said Act, we find that the submission that no construction at all can be made in the prohibited area or the regulated area, would be unsustainable.(Para 41)
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 - Section 2(dc)- Definition of "Construction" - The legislative intent is clear that the reÂconstruction,repair, renovation of the existing buildings has been excluded from the definition. Similarly, the construction, maintenance etc. of drains, drainage works, public latrines and urinals; the construction and maintenance of works meant for providing supply of water to public; and construction etc. for distribution of electricity, which could be construed to be essential services for catering to the needs of the public at large, have consciously been kept out of the definition of "construction" (Para 41, 42)
Interpretation of Statutes - It is a settled principle of law that all the provisions in the statute have to be read harmoniously. It is presumed that each and every provision has been brought by the legislature into the statute book with some purpose. A particular provision cannot be read in isolation and has to be read in context to each other. An attempt has to be made to reconcile all the provisions of the statute together, unless it is impossible (Para 40)
Public Interest Litigation - Frivolous PILs should be nipped in the bud - In the recent past, it is noticed that there is mushroom growth of public interest litigations. However, in many of such petitions, there is no public interest involved at all. The petitions are either publicity interest litigations or personal interest litigation. We highly deprecate practice of filing such frivolous petitions. They are nothing but abuse of process of law. They encroach upon a valuable judicial time which could be otherwise utilized for considering genuine issues. It is high time that such soÂcalled public interest litigations are nipped in the bud so that the developmental activities in the larger public interest are not stalled (Para 59)
Click here to read/download the judgment
