Supreme Court Criticizes Government’s Frivolous Litigations
Justice BR Gavai of the Supreme Court recently expressed concern over the revival of a ‘disposed of’ writ petition through a miscellaneous application. He highlighted that the Supreme Court has previously condemned such practices, often imposing significant costs. Addressing Additional Solicitor-General Aishwarya Bhati, Justice Gavai remarked
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!“How much costs, tell us? How can a disposed of petition be revived in an MA? We have deprecated this practice and dismissed with exemplary costs earlier. 70 per cent of such cases are frivolous.”
Despite ASG Bhati’s efforts to convince the bench, the court showed its reluctance, with Justice Gavai stating
“Poor farmers are unnecessarily being harassed. Thank you. Dismissed.”
He further added
“We do not appreciate this practice of reviving dead writ petitions by filing miscellaneous applications.”
However, upon the government law officer’s request, it was clarified that the dismissal was based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case.
Justice Gavai also shed light on the Union government’s propensity for litigation, stating that
“If the Union of India decides, 70 percent of litigation can be curtailed. We find so many frivolous litigations by the union as well as most of the state governments. If they decide to cut down, 70 percent of the role of this court would be reduced.”
In response, ASG Bhati assured the bench of their efforts, mentioning
“Each case comes to us to assess its fitness, so we are trying to be more ‘circumspect’ when concluding that a matter is fit [for litigation].”
Justice Gavai, however, retorted
“We only read in newspapers that litigation policies are coming.”
This isn’t the first instance where the Supreme Court has voiced its concerns over unnecessary government litigation contributing to the already burgeoning caseload. In May, a bench led by Justice Gavai observed that nearly 40% of the litigations pursued by the Central and State governments were frivolous.
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, in April, emphasized the need for the Central government to embrace mediation as a primary method of dispute resolution. He asserted
“The motto of the Union government and its agencies should be ‘mediate, not litigate’.”
This sentiment was echoed in November of the previous year when Attorney General for India,
R Venkataramani, urged a reevaluation of statutory provisions that allow direct appeals to the Supreme Court from various tribunals. He commented
“It is important that the Government stops overloading Supreme Court with endless statutory appeals alongside seamless and huge flow of cases from high courts. The conversion of Supreme Court into a small causes court must stop.”
These observations underscore the pressing need for the government to reevaluate its litigation strategy, potentially reducing the strain on the judiciary and promoting more efficient methods of dispute resolution.
