Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Recently, the new government in Madhya Pradesh waived the short-term agricultural loans granted to the farmers in the state. An advocate named Mohit Kumar filed a Public Interest Litigation against the Government order waiving agricultural loan. The Court observed that there were news reports about the PIL filed by the petitioner, and highly doubted that the petition was for want of publicity.
The Petitioner, however, argued that waiving of loans is detrimental to the economy of the country as the other states follow the same course of action. Further, he said that the government order is against public policy as it attracts section 123 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, which deals with corrupt practice.
The court made its observation by stating that the court is in no position to solve the political issues, and it is not the appropriate forum to exclude political issues. The court said that the petitioner is trying to have the court rush in where angels fear to trade, and when the court asked him if he had studied economics as a subject, the petitioner evaded the question and cited different materials in support of his contention. This raised serious doubts about the credentials of the petitioner.
Consequently, the court said that the PIL is merely a publicity stunt by the petitioner, and the allegations could not be adjudicated upon due to the existence of political undertones. Hence, the petitioner cannot use the Writ Petition filed under article 226 of the Indian Constitution as a disguise for want of publicity.
86540
103860
630
114
59824