Sheer abuse of PIL says HC; slaps Rs 50,000 cost on contractor challenging bid conditions

MUMBAI: Holding that the PIL was an “sheer abuse’ of judicial process , Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by a contractor challenging conditions of a tender issued by a government body and I imposed “exemplary cost” of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner. The cost is to be paid within four months to the civic-run KEM Hospital in Mumbai.

A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor passed an order in PIL by one Nilesh Kamble who claimed to be a social worker with a business similar to the one mentioned in the tender issued by the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA).

His grievance was to the eligibility conditions in the bid.

The bench after hearing the petitioner’s counsel and Akshay Shinde counsel for MMRDA said it was 'unfortunate' that it was called upon to adjudicate a petition 'purportedly filed in public interest’ though it has “ apparently has been filed with oblique motives.”

“On one hand this petitioner intends to espouse public cause and on the other hand, the petitioner himself states that he is engaged in similar business and accordingly, it is explicit that the proceedings of this writ petition have been instituted for pursuing personal and extraneous cause and not a public cause, the HC said in it order.

The HC observed how “In our jurisprudence there has been a phenomenal rise of the PIL petitions being filed before the superior Courts.” It said, “The Rule of locus has been relaxed permitting any member of the society or an organization to file a petition in the interest of general public, for espousing the cause especially of those who, for some or the other reason, are in a disadvantageous situation, the reason may be poverty, illiteracy or their social status. However, permitting a contractor to file a PIL petition challenging the conditions of a tender, in our opinion, is nothing but a sheer abuse of process of Court and an effort to pollute the purity of the stream of public interest litigation. “