The petitioner filed a PIL regarding suicides by farmers protesting Maharastra reservation. The Court held the petition was merely an emotional appeal and dismissed it at the threshold without entertaining the prayers under Article 226.
The petition styled as public interest litigation is dismissed at the threshold.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
121.18pil
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.121 OF 2018
Sachin s/o Subhashrao Solunke,
Age: 34 years, Occ: Agri.,
R/o. Nandgaon, Tq. Chakur,
Dist. Latur.
..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principle Secretary, Home Department Mantralaya Mumbai-32.
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad.
3. R.T.I. Online CAD, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. ..RESPONDENTS
Mr R.V. Gore, Advocate for petitioner;
Mrs A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondents
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & MANISH PITALE,JJ.
DATE : 3rd OCTOBER, 2018
ORAL ORDER :
This petition is styled as Public Interest
Litigation. The petitioner claims to be an
agriculturist and one of the participant in the
silence march of Maratha Kranti Muk Morcha . The prayers in the petition are ; to direct the respondents to take necessary steps that to prevent suicides of Marathas over reservation demand, to
direct the respondents to submit comprehensive
report dealing with the causes of suicides by
Marthas over reservation demand. The other prayers
are interim prayers.
2.The petitioner submits that there is a
long standing demand for reservation of Maratha
community and agitations were also taken up by
democratic way like silence morcha . It is submitted in the petition that there were as many as 58 silence protest morchas organized in all over Maharashtra. It is stated that on 21st July, 2018 Jalsamadhi Andolan was organized at Gangapur on the bridge of Kaygaon Toka and though there was information provided to certain revenue authorities, no steps were taken. One Kakasaheb Shinde committed suicide by jumping in Godawari river to support the demand. Then it is stated that
(3)
certain students who were prosecuting the studies
also joined agitation. Then it is stated that the
State Government is only silent spectator, as such,
it is need of hour that the State Government should
form a policy for comprehensive study of extreme
test being taken by the youth. The State
Government should form a committee and set up
counseling centres at various places.
3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner himself is one of the participant in morcha . It is also not in dispute that certain morchas were silent march and it was a democratic way without
there being any disturbance to law and order
situation but what the petitioner prays for, by
styling the petition as public interest litigation
is nothing but an emotional appeal. The
petitioner, if he himself is one of the activist and is taking active part in morcha , nothing prevents either to the petitioner or to those all other members of the organization or even sympathizers of such organization to create a
121.18pil (4)
general awareness amongst the youth who are
participating in those agitations and impress upon
those youth not to take any extreme steps
endangering their life which is most precious one.
4. Insofar as demand of reservation is
concerned, it is not in dispute that the issue is
pending before the Court and judicial decision is
awaited.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioner placed heavy reliance on the judgment of
principal seat in the matter of Secretary, All
India Biodynamic and Organic Farming Association
vs Principal Secretary of the Government of
Maharashtra and others, reported in2006(3)
Bom.C.R. 867. This petition espouses the cause of
farmers' suicide. Though learned Counsel appearing
for the petitioner placed heavy reliance on the
above referred judgment, we are unable to accept
the submission of learned Counsel for the reason
that these suicides were committed by the farmers
(5)
who were in deep depression and were not having any
organisational assistance. Thus, depressed farmers
took extreme steps and this situation was
considered by the Court. There is absolutely no
dispute on the consideration of the Court on the
aspect of the issue of farmers' suicide who were
mostly illiterate, unorganized.
6. The petitioner himself submits that suicides were committed by the youth who were participating in the agitation. At the cost of repetition, we state that exercise of agitation and silent morcha was undertaken at organizational level. These organizations were certainly inclusive of not only students but persons from other walks of life and at the organizational level, it is not difficult for those who are either actively participating in organization or even sympathizer of the cause, to create awareness and impress upon youth not to take extreme steps. On the contrary, it is a duty of all those who are in organization to create awareness amongst youth to take recourse
121.18pil
(6)
to lawful means but not to take any extreme step in
the heat of passion.
7.On the backdrop of these facts, we are of
the clear opinion that the petition with the above
referred prayers filed by the petitioner styled as
public interest litigation cannot be entertained by
us and more soever by exercising powers of this
Court under Article 21 or 226 of the Constitution
of India as claimed by the petitioner. As such,
public interest litigation is dismissed at the
threshold.
(MANISH PITALE)(PRASANNA B. VARALE)
JUDGE JUDGE
Tupe
Digitally signed S.U. by S.U. Tupe Date: 2018.10.05 15:32:23 +0530 Tupe
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a public interest litigation petition styled by the petitioner can be entertained when it serves as an emotional appeal regarding suicides linked to reservation agitations.
Whether the High Court can exercise powers under Article 21 or Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the State to prevent suicides amidst pending judicial demands for reservation.
Sachin s/o Subhashrao Solunke
The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principle Secretary, Home Department
PRASANNA B. VARALE
MANISH PITALE
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court