Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • PIL Draft

    Uploaded by

    tanuj
    31 views1 page
    The Supreme Court dealt with the question of when a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can be entertained by the courts. The court discussed past judgments and established 10 conditions for a PIL to be maintainable, including that the impugned action must violate fundamental rights or legal rights, be illegal or malicious, and approach the court in the public interest rather than with malice or personal motives. In this case, the petitioners challenged an established industrial practice of updating terms of service and sharing data with third parties. Therefore, the court was asked to dismiss the PIL.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    PIL draft.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court dealt with the question of when a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can be entertained by the courts. The court discussed past judgments and established 10 conditions for a PIL to be maintainable, including that the impugned action must violate fundamental rights or legal rights, be illegal or malicious, and approach the court in the public interest rather than with malice or personal motives. In this case, the petitioners challenged an established industrial practice of updating terms of service and sharing data with third parties. Therefore, the court was asked to dismiss the PIL.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    31 views1 page

    PIL Draft

    Uploaded by

    tanuj
    The Supreme Court dealt with the question of when a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can be entertained by the courts. The court discussed past judgments and established 10 conditions for a PIL to be maintainable, including that the impugned action must violate fundamental rights or legal rights, be illegal or malicious, and approach the court in the public interest rather than with malice or personal motives. In this case, the petitioners challenged an established industrial practice of updating terms of service and sharing data with third parties. Therefore, the court was asked to dismiss the PIL.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    In the case of Prashant Mehta vs State Of H.P.

    & Ors 2021 SCC OnLine HP 5438, the


    Supreme Court dealt with the question of the prima facie validity of the filing of a Public
    Interest Litigation. The court by recognising a catena of judgments discussed at length when
    a PIL can be entertained and when can the court reject a PIL. The court after considering all
    the case laws held that a PIL can be maintainable only if the following conditions are met-

    1) That the impugned action is violative of any of the Fundamental Rights or any other
    legal right.
    2) That the action complained of is illegal or mala fide and the individuals are unable to
    protect their interests against such actions.
    3) That the people should approach the court in the public interest for redressal of a
    public injury arising from breach of any constitutional law or duty.
    4) That the litigants must not approach the court with some mala fide approach or
    personal vengeance.
    5) That the process of public interest litigation was not being abused by politicians or
    other busy bodies for political or unrelated objective.
    6) That if the relief not granted, it will result in the loss of faith of the common man in
    judiciary.
    7) That the state action was being covered up on the grounds of technicalities.
    8) PIL can be filed through a petition or a letter or any other information but upon
    satisfaction of its nature by the court.
    9) That the person approaching the court must come with clean hands.
    10) That the court must be satisfied that its forum was not being misused by frivolous
    litigants with a mala fide/personal vendetta.

    In the present case, the petitioners are singled out as one individual entity with reference to
    their submissions and their Written Arguments. Even the updates for terms of service and
    sharing of data with third parties is an established industrial practice.

    It is therefore, on these grounds, it is prayed before the court to dismiss this Public Interest
    Litigation with any other relief this court deems fit in the interest of justice, equity and good
    conscience.

    You might also like