The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) with costs of Rs 5,000 payable to the Bihar State Legal Services Authority.
The petitioner, claiming to be a social worker, had filed the PIL seeking an inquiry into the activities of two federations.
However, the bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy observed that the petitioner’s attempt was to settle inter-se disputes between two federations, which could not be maintained in a petition due to lack of jurisdiction.
The court also noted that the petitioner had not impleaded certain persons whose appointments were being contested.
Furthermore, when the matter was taken up, none appeared for the petitioner, leading the court to conclude that the petition was a clear abuse of the process of law.
The court dismissed the PIL with costs, directing the petitioner to pay Rs 5,000 to the Bihar State Legal Services Authority within two weeks.
Failure to comply would enable the authority to proceed for recovery by taking measures similar to recovery of arrears due on land through the District Magistrate.
The petitioner would also be liable for the charges incurred for making such recovery.
The post appeared first on .
The petitioner, claiming to be a social worker, had filed the PIL seeking an inquiry into the activities of two federations.
However, the bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy observed that the petitioner’s attempt was to settle inter-se disputes between two federations, which could not be maintained in a petition due to lack of jurisdiction.
The court also noted that the petitioner had not impleaded certain persons whose appointments were being contested.
Furthermore, when the matter was taken up, none appeared for the petitioner, leading the court to conclude that the petition was a clear abuse of the process of law.
The court dismissed the PIL with costs, directing the petitioner to pay Rs 5,000 to the Bihar State Legal Services Authority within two weeks.
Failure to comply would enable the authority to proceed for recovery by taking measures similar to recovery of arrears due on land through the District Magistrate.
The petitioner would also be liable for the charges incurred for making such recovery.
The post appeared first on .