Don't You Think PILs Are Important To Raise The Voice Of People In A Democracy? Supreme Court Asks Solicitor General

"Don't you think PILs are important to raise the voice of the people in a democracy" Justice L Nageswara Rao, presiding judge of the bench today asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta while hearing a plea challenging the order which retrospectively amended the tenure of the present Director of Enforcement Directorate, Sanjay Kumar Mishra.The bench posed this query when the Solicitor General questioned the locus standi of the petitioner-NGO 'Common Cause' and urged that the Supreme Court should stop the "trend to run a parallel administration" through PILs."This is a consistent trend to run a parallel administration.Should that trend continue or should your Lordship consider stopping this trend?" submitted SG while arguing that service matters could not be adjudicated in a PIL. Responding to the Court's question on the importance of PIL's in democracy and replying in affirmative, SG said that there were however some organizations whose only purpose was to file PILs. "Yes, but there are some organisations whose only purpose is to file PIL's," SG submitted. During the course of hearing, Solicitor General contended that the trend of purposely filing PILs had led to sheer abuse of law. "This has led to sheer abuse by those who exist with the sole object of filing PILs purposefully. This trend needs to be taken care of by the Top Court. This desire to act as 'Extra-Constitutional Supervisor' is not restricted to the executive but also judiciary & legislature. Money Laundering is a serious, social, financial menace…," submitted Solicitor General, referring to the portions of the counter-affidavit filed by the Union in the plea.The SG said said that back to back PILs filed by organizations like Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) against the appointment of the CVC have been dismissed by the Supreme Court. "This organization (Centre for PIL) also exists only for filing PIL's. Back to back petitions have been filed by various organisations with regards to appointment. There are judgments which say that in service matters there cannot be any PIL." The Solicitor General had also submitted that, "This has become a trend & practice. Public spirited person approaching court challenging tenure is okay but fighting against an individual is not. I have my separate arguments on that. The petitioner may have some interest if he's fighting against an individual officer. I don't know."In response to SG's submissions, Justice Rao said, "Prashant Bhushan and Dushyant Dave would have many matters where public interest has been served."The bench said that while it took note of the SG's arguments against the locus standi of the petitioner, it wanted arguments on merits as well."We're taking note of your arguments but you should make your arguments on merits", Justice Rao said. Justifying the extension of the ED Director's tenure as 3 years from 2 years through an amendment made to his appointment order with retrospective effect, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta today had argued that the extension was given for good reasons recorded in writing. Earlier, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave had concluded the arguments for the petitioner(Report about that may be read here). The arguments will continue tomorrow. Case Title: Common Cause v. Union of IndiaClick Here To Read/ Download Order

Don't You Think PILs Are Important To Raise The Voice Of People In A Democracy? Supreme Court Asks Solicitor General

Shruti Kakkar

"Prashant Bhushan and Dushyant Dave would have many matters where public interest has been served", Justice Rao said.

Tags