Synopsis: To prevent them from “getting into the wrong hands,” the petitioner did not reveal any any specifics of his proposed project.
The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of Rs . 50,000 on a petitioner seeking financial assistance of Rs. 70,000 crore and human resources from the government authorities.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan passed the order on the a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Trilok Goyal (Petitioner).
The petitioner told the Court, while referring to the problems of waterlogging, air pollution, road accidents, etc., that he had a project that would provide a safe and healthy environment if implemented.
However, to prevent them from “getting into the wrong hands,” the petitioner did not state or reveal any specifics of his proposed project.
In stating that the resources needed for his proposed project were not within his capacity, he urged the Court to pass an order directing that around 30 people from different departments of government, to be provided to him as human resource.
The petitioner stated that he was uncertain about the exact specifications when the Court asked about the budget needed for the implementation of the proposed project.
He submitted, however, that the budget demanded would be approximately the same as the budget allocated under the 2005 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), i.e. approximately Rs.70,000 Crores, which the respondent authorities could provide.
In spite of the petitioner’s submissions, the Court held that it was not a public interest litigation, but a “perverse litigation” since it was full of absurdity.
The court stated that the petitioner had no reason for allocating such an enormous amount to his project, and the petition lacked basic specifics, including the nature of the project proposed. It should be kept in mind that it is not possible to waste public money and resources in this way and stated that the petition is full of absurdity, and thus no prayer can be granted. The court further stated that the filing of such types of litigation is a complete waste of judicial resources.
The PIL was therefore, rejected made on behalf of the petitioner at a cost of Rs 50,000. The expenses will be paid to the Delhi State Legal Services Authority by the petitioner.