Bombay High Court Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar expressed his frustration with the increasing number of frivolous ‘public interest litigation’ (PIL) petitions being filed before the court. During the disposal of a PIL, the judge emphasized that these baseless petitions were consuming valuable court time.
The judge remarked, ““Lesser said the better for such litigations… Frivolous petitions. Bring some genuine cause that brings change in society. We are not able to take up other matters because of such litigations.”
The court made this observation while handling a plea from a journalist who had challenged a tender released by the state government.
The judge raised questions regarding the journalist’s interest in a specific tender, inquiring about the sources of their information and why those details were not disclosed in the petition, as mandated by the Bombay High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules of 2010.
In addition, the Court questioned two other petitions filed by lawyers, seeking clarification on their motivations for engaging in the cause. The judge also asked the lawyer-petitioners whether they were registered with legal aid services.
The judge suggested, “If you want to espouse a social cause, enrol in legal aid and provide pro bono services.”
The judge emphasized the need for petitioners to submit their details in order to verify if they had genuine intentions and a legitimate public interest in approaching the court.
The judge suggested “We can remove the petitioner and appoint an amicus and continue with the cause. If you (petitioner) want to be associated with the cause, file your particulars. We are not saying the cause is not genuine. We are saying, petitioner is not genuine. We can take suo motu cognizance of media reports and go on with a matter without you. Why do we need you for that?”
The bench, led by the Acting Chief Justice, directed the PIL petitioners to file affidavits stating their bonafides.
The Court required the petitioners to provide specific details such as their occupation, source of income, and the source of information that led them to file the petitions, along with supporting documents to substantiate their claims.
The Court emphasized that the affidavit should include documentary evidence demonstrating why the petitioners were genuinely concerned with the cause and had no personal interest involved.
Furthermore, the Court cautioned that if the petitioners failed to satisfy the Court regarding their bonafides, their petitions would be dismissed.
Expressing dissatisfaction, the Acting Chief Justice criticized the registry for not flagging the absence of these details before listing the petitions for hearing.
Acting Chief Justice Jamdar has been presiding over PILs at the principal bench of the Bombay High Court on Wednesdays each week. Since assuming the role of Acting Chief Justice on May 31, following the departure of Chief Justice RD Dhanuka, the bench led by him has issued 13 such orders thus far.
