Division Bench holds that individual advocates cannot maintain a PIL representing the interests of the entire legal fraternity and the general public without establishing their authority to espouse the collective cause.
The Telangana High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the proposed construction of the new Vikarabad District Court Complex at Billadakla/Mekalagandi in Vikarabad district, holding that individual advocates cannot claim to represent the wider legal fraternity and the general public without establishing their authority or competence to do so.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Suddala Chalapathi Rao heard the PIL filed by four practising advocates, including Bandi Narayana and others from Vikarabad district.
The petitioners challenged the State Government’s decision to establish the proposed District Court Complex on Billadakla/Mekalagandi poramboke land. They contended that the selection of the site was arbitrary and contrary to public interest, claiming that former Principal District and Sessions Judges had found the location unsuitable for the proposed judicial infrastructure.
The petitioners further submitted that alternative locations, including the Horticulture Centre at Yennepally and land at Shivareddypet, would be more suitable for the construction of the new court complex. They sought directions to the State Government to reconsider the proposed location after undertaking a proper feasibility and suitability assessment, taking into account the convenience and interests of litigants, judicial officers, court staff, advocates and the general public.
Government Questions Maintainability of PIL
Opposing the petition, the Government Pleader questioned the maintainability of the PIL as well as the locus standi of the petitioners. It was argued that the petitioners, in their individual capacity, could not claim to represent the entire legal fraternity and the general public without obtaining authorisation from the concerned Bar Associations.
High Court’s Observations and Decision
While considering the maintainability of the petition, Acting Chief Justice P. Sam Koshy observed that individuals cannot maintain a PIL seeking to represent a larger section of society without establishing that they are authorised or competent to espouse such a collective cause.
The Bench held that the petitioners had failed to establish their authority or competence to represent the interests of the entire legal fraternity and the wider public in their individual capacity.
Accordingly, the Telangana High Court dismissed the PIL, declining to entertain the challenge to the proposed site for the new Vikarabad District Court Complex.
