The petition, filed in-person, sought to remove regional words from the titles of Punjab National Bank and Bank of Baroda via Article 226. The Court held the petition to be misconceived and dismissed it, finding no substantial public interest.
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.
Urmila Ingale
Digitally signed URMILA by URMILAPRAMOD PRAMOD INGALE INGALE Date:2022.07.30 13:46:46 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 17 OF 2022
Onkar Sharma .. Petitioner Vs.
Union of India and anr. .. Respondents
Mr. Onkar Sharma, Petitioner in-person present.
CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ. & M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : JULY 28, 2022
P.C. :
"Therefore, it is prayed to pass an order to christen afresh the title name of Punjab National Bank and Bank of Baroda by removing regional words (i.e. Punjab and Baroda) from its title name."
1
established on July 20, 1908. Both Banks were initially set up as private sector banks. These banks were nationalised in 1969. Vide notification dated March 30, 2019 issued by the Reserve Bank of India (hereafter "the RBI", for short), two nationalised banks viz. Dena Bank and Vijaya Bank were merged with the Bank of Baroda. By a notification dated March 28, 2020 issued by RBI, two nationalised banks viz. Oriental Bank of Commerce and United Bank of India were merged into Punjab National Bank.
2
same was forwarded to the Finance Minister of India on April 28, 2021 over e-mail.
3
The petitioner has not pointed out any statutory embargo prohibiting these banks from using the regional name. These are ultimately matters for consideration of the administration/competent authorities of the concerned banks.
4
courts by judicial innovation and creativity started giving necessary directions and passing orders in the public interest. Their Lordships while explaining the rule of locus standi in the context of PIL petition observed that the rule of locus standi was diluted and the traditional meaning of`aggrieved person' was broadened to provide access to justice to a very large section of the society which was otherwise not getting any benefit from the judicial system. The development of public interest litigation has been extremely significant development in the history of the Indian jurisprudence. The decisions of the Supreme Court in the 1970's loosened the strict locus standi requirements to permit filing of petitions on behalf of marginalized and deprived sections of the society by public spirited individuals, institutions and/or bodies. The higher Courts exercised wide powers given to them under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution.
(1) The Courts must encourage genuine and bona fide PIL and effectively discourage and curb the PIL filed for extraneous considerations.
(2) Instead of every individual Judge devising his own procedure for dealing with the public interest litigation, it would be appropriate for each High Court
5
to properly formulate rules for encouraging the genuine PIL and discouraging the PIL filed with oblique motives. Consequently, we request that the High Courts who have not yet framed the rules, should frame the rules within three months. The Registrar General of each High Court is directed to ensure that a copy of the rules prepared by the High Court is sent to the Secretary General of this Court immediately thereafter.
(3) The Courts should prima facie verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL.
(4) The Courts should be prima facie satisfied regarding the correctness of the contents of the petition before entertaining a PIL.
(5) The Courts should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest is involved before entertaining the petition.
(6) The Courts should ensure that the petition which involves larger public interest, gravity and urgency must be given priority over other petitions.
(7) The Courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation.
(8) The Courts should also ensure that the petitions filed by busybodies for extraneous and ulterior motives must be discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or by adopting similar novel methods to curb frivolous petitions and the petitions filed for extraneous considerations.
6
genuine public harm or public injury. We are more than satisfied that none of the parameters set out by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttaranchal (supra) are satisfied to enable us to entertain this PIL petition.
(M. S. KARNIK, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a PIL petition seeking modification of the names of nationalised banks by removing regional words involves substantial public interest warranting this Court's intervention.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal and othersRelied on¶26
State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal and others, (2010) 3 SCC 402 · Who else cites this
Onkar Sharma
Union of India
DIPANKAR DATTA
M. S. KARNIK
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
