Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench comprising Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla observed while hearing a review petition against its order that simple self-serving statement that PIL-petitioners are social workers would not suffice to invoke the public interest writ jurisdiction. Rather, the person will have to prove through records that the social work engaged in by the PIL-Petitioners is actually in the areas of public interest.
In the above-mentioned case, the government had issued a notification declaring some villages as panpatha sanctuary. Revised guidelines for rehabilitation of the displaced persons of such villages was issued by the National Tiger Conservation Authority. However, the package has not been revised since it was issued in the year 2008. A writ petition was filed challenging this notification by a group of social workers allegedly espousing the claims of marginal farmers. This petition was dismissed by the court as not maintainable on the grounds that social workers cannot espouse the vested interests of the landowners. Subsequently, a review petition was filed where the social workers argued that the affected persons were a large portion of the society belonging to the marginalized section thus affecting public interest at large. The petitioners cited the apex court judgment of Guruvayoor Devaswom case to embrace their claims. The court rejecting the argument observed that there was no assertion of any activity undertaken by these social workers in the villages in question before the said notification. It further observed that the strangers to the land could not maintain the writ petition.
The court concluded by saying that PIL is not a pill for all wrongs and it is a weapon which has to be used with utmost care. and in respect of land acquisition at the instance of the third person, PIL would not be maintainable in the courts of law as the legal rights for the same are vested with the landowners and only they have a right to assert violations before the competent courts of law in cases of infringement of their rights as conferred under Article 300(A).
86540
103860
630
114
59824