Can’t entertain PIL merely highlighting irregularities: HC to BJP leader Kirit Somaiya
In a PIL filed in June last year, Somaiya sought the court’s intervention to determine the true nature of illegalities and irregularities allegedly committed on a property in Alibag.
3 min read
BJP leader Kirit SomaiyaThe Bombay High Court on Wednesday, while hearing a PIL by BJP leader Kirit Somaiya seeking a court-monitored investigation into a property owned by Rashmi Thackeray, wife of former Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray in Raigad district, sought to know why it should entertain the plea “without cause” merely for academic reasons.
“If somebody has erred in law then there can be some action, there could be consequences. If an illegality is found, then it can be punished or prosecuted. Merely for highlighting irregularity, petitions cannot be entertained. Can we entertain a petition for academic purposes without there being a cause?”a bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor questioned Somaiya.
In a PIL filed in June last year, Somaiya sought the court’s intervention to determine the true nature of illegalities and irregularities allegedly committed on a property in Alibag. The petition listed Uddhav Thackeray, his wife, MLA Ravindra Waikar and wife Manisha Waikar, as defendants.
The PIL claimed that property tax receipts suggested the existence of a structure that was deliberately covered up by Thackeray and Waikar in their affidavits submitted before the Election Commission under the Representation of the People Act, adding that this constituted “an electoral offence and corrupt practice”.
Somaiya also claimed the permanent structure on the property was constructed without obtaining any sanction and that since it was situated within 100 metres of the coastline, the construction was in contravention of the Coastal Regulatory Zone rules.
Somaiya’s representative, advocate Rajeev Kumar claimed that the court’s intervention was required to ascertain the ‘true nature of alleged illegalities and irregularities committed. However, unconvinced with the directions sought, the bench remarked, “You (Somaiya) come to court for a grievance, not to highlight something. According to you, the respondent has done something. You try for a cure, or prosecution. No petition can be entertained only for highlighting the issue.”
Kumar sought from the court to consider the PIL as merely seeking information as a citizen of the country as someone who has committed an offence and used his powers for his own advantage. Kumar claimed Somaiya had approached the concerned authorities but they responded that the matter was not within their ambit, therefore he approached HC to know the truth and for the court to go through public records.
You May Like
Photos
