HC flays counsel, petitioner for misusing PILs

THE PIL said more than 1,500 acres of Boodhan land was acquired by the company for real estate purpose. However, the petitioner did not disclose to the court that he had filed personal litigations against the company.

Stressing that private interests and issues should not be brought before court in the guise of public interest litigations, the Telangana High Court on Friday chided counsel and a petitioner for misusing the concept of PILs.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Annireddy Abhishek Reddy said it was in a mood to impose heavy costs on the petitioner for the misuse of PIL provisions. The court noted that the petitioner had filed a case against Narne Estates Private Limited, a real estate firm, with which he was already engaged in litigation.

With a request from his counsel Rapolu Bhasker, the court let the petitioner withdraw the PIL and avoided imposing costs.

Panjal Suresh Goud had filed the PIL seeking a CBI inquiry into alleged land-grabbing by Narne Estates. The petitioner impleaded the CBI, the revenue department and the defence establishment, contending that Narne Estates and its functionaries were acting against the interests of the people.

The PIL said more than 1,500 acres of Boodhan land was acquired by the company for real estate purpose. However, the petitioner did not disclose to the court that he had filed personal litigations against the company.

Goud had mentioned in the PIL that he had no personal interest and the PIL was filed only for public benefit. Counsel for the petitioner admitted that four litigations were pending between the petitioner and the company.

The court warned counsel and the petitioner that what they did amounted to perjury and that the court could impose exemplary costs. At this stage, the petitioner chose to withdraw the PIL.