The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed alleging that the basis infrastructure and staff are missing while running the project of Urban and Rural Mobile Medical Unit and Operation and Management of HEARSES (Shav Vahan), which was being run in the State of Chhattisgarh.
The Petitioner who appeared in person submitted before the High Court that he has filed the application under Right to Information Act, 2005 before the respondent authorities seeking information with regard to the infrastructure and staff of Rural and Urban Mobile Medical Unit and also the information with regard to Shav Vahan.
He further submitted that so far as the information with regard to Shav Vahan is concerned, the respondent vide letter dated 23.11.2020 has only given the copy of the agreement, but the detailed information as sought by him has not been given to him till date, thereafter, he had made complaint before the respondents as well as to the Chief Secretary of the State of Chhattisgarh and the Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State of Chhattisgarh by sending email dated 28.09.2020.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Rajani Dubey held that the Courts should, prima facie, verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL.
“It is also well settled that the Courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation. The Courts should ensure the jurisdiction in public interest is invoked for genuine purposes by persons who have bona fide credentials and who do not seek to espouse or pursue any extraneous object. Otherwise, the jurisdiction in public interest can become a source of misuse by private persons seeking to pursue their own vested interests.”
Considering the prayers and pleadings made in the writ petition which is styled as Public Interest Litigation, the Court was not satisfied that this is a genuine petition filed in public interest so as to invoke the jurisdiction in the public interest under Article 226 of the Constitution. “The petition is a sketchy one and appears to be filed for personal gain and publicity”.