Chennai: Dismissing a public interest litigation, which sought a direction to the Union and state governments to enact a special law for jallikattu, the Madras high court has slammed the organisation, which filed the PIL for using a misleading name-Centre for PIL.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M. Sundar dismissed the PIL filed by Tamil Nadu Centre for public interest litigation represented by its managing trustee K.K. Ramesh.
Noting that there cannot be a specialist organisation to file public interest litigations, the bench said the name under which this organisation is being run creates a wrong impression in the public as if the organisation is a specialist only in filing public interest litigations. An organisation doing voluntary work and having expertise in a particular field may approach the court. “We cannot allow an organisation to pick up the morning newspaper, find out what is the issue raised and file half-baked petitions without any knowledge of the subject or law and that too without any research on the subject. We are, thus, of the view that any petition which is filed in the name of ‘Tamil Nadu Centre for Public Interest Litigation’ cannot be maintained and no such petitions shall be maintained in this name and style”, the bench added.
On the merits of the case, the bench said the lack of expertise on the part of the petitioner was apparent from the fact that he seeks a direction to enact a special law. “We say so, as it is the sole prerogative of the government to enact law and the court cannot issue direction to the government to enact a law”, the bench added.
The bench said this issue was well settled in a catena of decisions of the SC and a full Bench decision of the Delhi HC, holding that a writ of mandamus (direction) can be issued only in a case where there was a statutory duty imposed upon a person and there was a failure to discharge that statutory duty and that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to the legislature to enact a particular legislation, as the same was the sole prerogative of the legislature. “In view of the aforesaid, this court is not empowered to issue such a writ of mandamus as is sought by the petitioner and it is for the government and the legislature to take a call on the issue”, the bench added.
