Dr. Duryodhan Sahu And Ors vs Jitendra Kumar Mishra And Ors on 25 August, 1998
3. At the outset, Shri Anand Soni, learned Additional Advocate General
appearing for the respondents/State submitted that this public interest litigation
is not maintainable, since the part of the prayer clause relates to service matter
and as held by the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 6/15/2023
2:48:32 PM
3
Others Vs. Jitendra Kumar Mishra and Others reported in (1998) 7 SCC
273, wherein it has been held that ''in service matters, PILs should not be
entertained, the inflow of the so called PILs involving service matters continues
unabated in the courts and strangely are entertained. The least the High Courts
could do is to throw them out on the basis of the said decision. This tendency
is being slowly permitted to percolate for setting in motion criminal law
jurisdiction , often unjustifiably just for gaining publicity and giving adverse
publicity to their opponents. The other interesting aspect is that in the PIL,
official documents are being annexed without indicating as to how petitioner
came to possess them. In one case, it was noticed that an interesting answer
was given as to its possession, It was stated that a packet was lying on the road
and when out of curiosity, the petitioner opened it, he found copies of the
official documents. Apart from the sinister manner, if any, of getting such
copies, the real brain or force behind such case would get exposed to find out
whether it was the bonafide venture. Whenever, such frivolous pleas are taken
to explain possession, the Court should do well not only to dismiss the petition,
but also to impose exemplary cost as it prima-facie gives impression of oblique
motives involved, and in most cases shows proxy litigation. Where the
petitioner has not even a remote link with the issues involved, it becomes
imperative for the Court to lift the veil and uncover the real purpose of the
petition and the real person behind it. It would be desirable for the Courts to
filter out frivolous petitions and dismiss them with costs so that the message
goes in the right direction that petitions filed with oblique motives do not have
approval of the Courts''.