Read Time: 06 minutes
The court noted that "there is nothing to suggest that any of the funds collected pursuant to those advertisements have not reached the intended beneficiaries”
The Kerala High Court, in a scathing judgment, dismissed a writ petition filed by a lawyer, C. Shukkur, alleging misappropriation of funds collected for the victims of the recent landslide in Wayanad District. The court rebuked the lawyer for filing the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for “cheap publicity” and imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on the petitioner.
“The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not one that can be misused by persons who appear to be acting for no other reason than for obtaining cheap publicity,” the court observed.
A Division Bench, consisting of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M., made the observation while hearing the plea seeking the establishment of a centralized system for managing disaster relief funds for the Wayanad landslide victims. The petitioner alleged that the funds collected for relief were not reaching the intended beneficiaries.
The court criticised the petition for lacking genuine public interest and appearing to be driven by a desire for publicity. The Court noted “the writ petition is absolutely shorn of any details regarding any misuse by those allegedly collecting funds for the purpose of transmitting the same to the intended beneficiaries viz. the victims of the recent landslide that occurred in Wayanad District. What is produced along with the writ petition are copies of various pamphlets issued by organisations/associations of persons who are engaged in such fund collection. There is nothing to suggest that any of the funds collected pursuant to those advertisements have not reached the intended beneficiaries.”
Furthermore, the court highlighted that the petitioner had not approached the police or the district administration with any representation or complaint regarding the alleged misuse of funds, observing that the petition was an example of misuse of public interest litigation, which is a serious concern for the judicial process.
The court cited the Supreme Court's observations in 'Tehseen Poonawalla v. Union of India and Another', which stated that frivolous or motivated petitions, ostensibly invoking the public interest, detract from the time and attention which courts must devote to genuine causes.
“In the instant case, we find the writ petition to be pathetically devoid of any substance much less any material that would point to a matter of public interest. The averments in the writ petition effectively question the intelligence and prudence of the common man by assuming that the general public of this State are persons, who have lost the ability to think before they act. The petitioner ought to remind himself that he purportedly represents a people who hail from the most literate State in the country,” the court further stated.
Additionally, the court also directed the petitioner to pay the fine of Rs. 25,000 to the Chief Minister's Distress Relief Fund within two weeks, which would be utilised for the benefit of the landslide victims in Wayanad.
Cause Title: C Shukkur v State of Kerala [W.P.(C).No.28487/24]
Please Login or Register
