ADMIN LAW JUDGEMENT EXTRACTS –
1. Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors, 2004 - It is depressing to
note that on account of such trumpery proceedings initiated before the Courts,
innumerable days are wasted, which time otherwise could have been spent for the
disposal of cases of the genuine litigants. Though we spare no efforts in fostering and
developing the laudable concept of PIL and extending our long arm of sympathy to the
poor, the ignorant, the oppressed and the needy whose fundamental rights are infringed
and violated and whose grievances go unnoticed, un-represented and unheard; yet we
cannot avoid but express our opinion that while genuine litigants with legitimate
grievances relating to civil matters involving properties worth hundreds of millions of
rupees and criminal cases in which persons sentenced to death facing gallows under
untold agony and persons sentenced to life imprisonment and kept in incarceration for
long years, persons suffering from undue delay in service matters - government or
private, persons awaiting the disposal of cases wherein huge amounts of public revenue
or unauthorized collection of tax amounts are locked up, detenu expecting their release
from the detention orders etc. etc. are all standing in a long serpentine queue for years
with the fond hope of getting into the Courts and having their grievances redressed, the
busybodies, meddlesome interlopers, wayfarers or officious interveners having absolutely
no public interest except for personal gain or private profit either of themselves or as a
proxy of others or for any other extraneous motivation or for glare of publicity break the
queue muffing their faces by wearing the mask of public interest litigation and get into
the Courts by filing vexatious and frivolous petitions and thus criminally waste the
valuable time of the Courts and as a result of which the queue standing outside the doors
of the Courts never moves, which piquant situation creates frustration in the minds of the
genuine litigants and resultantly they loose faith in the administration of our judicial
system.
2. Common Cause Courts case - 58. In the same decision it has also been observed that
PIL is a weapon which is to be used with great care and circumspection.
59. Unfortunately, the truth is that PILs are being entertained by many courts as a routine
and the result is that the dockets of most of the superior courts are flooded with PILs,
most of which are frivolous or for which the judiciary has no remedy. As stated in
Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware's case (supra), public interest litigation has nowadays largely
become 'publicity interest litigation', 'private interest litigation', or 'politics interest
litigation' or the latest trend 'paise income litigation'. Much of P.I.L. is really blackmail.
60. Thus, Public Interest Litigation which was initially created as a useful judicial tool to
help the poor and weaker section of society who could not afford to come to courts, has,
in course of time, largely developed into an uncontrollable Frankenstein and a nuisance
which is threatening to choke the dockets of the superior courts obstructing the hearing of
the genuine and regular cases which have been waiting to be taken up for years together.
However, these decisions must be understood in a balanced way and not in an
unrealistic sense. For example, there is a great deal of poverty in this country and
poverty is destructive of most of the rights including the right to a dignified life. Can
then the Court issue a general directive that poverty be abolished from the country
because it violates Article 21 of the Constitution? Similarly, can the Court issue a
directive that unemployment be abolished by giving everybody a suitable job? Can the
Court stop price rise which now- a-days has become an alarming phenomenon in our
country? Can the Court issue a directive that corruption be abolished from the country?
Article 21 is not a 'brahmastra' for the judiciary to justify every kind of directive.
