Right To Access Courts Not Absolute; Must Be Exercised Responsibly: SC Imposes Rs. 1 Lakh Costs On Unscrupulous Litigant Filing Repetitive & Meritless Pleas
Supreme Court dismissed SLP filed by an ex-employee against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) challenging his dismissal Order.
The Supreme Court imposed costs of Rs. 1 Lakh on an “unscrupulous” litigant filing repetitive & meritless pleas while holding that the right to access courts is not absolute and must be exercised responsibly.
The Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by an ex-employee (Petitioner) against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) challenging his dismissal Order. The Court observed that the Petitioner had repeatedly misused judicial remedies to challenge his dismissal from service, culminating in an "unscrupulous" Second Review Petition filed after an inordinate delay of over 11 years.
The Bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Kumar observed, “This Special Leave Petition before us is yet another stark example of the blatant misuse and abuse of the judicial process. The petitioner, seemingly blinded by his own sense of grievance, has embarked on a relentless and frivolous litigation spree, dragging this Court and the High Court through multiple meritless review petitions, appeals, and motions, all stemming from his well-reasoned removal from service. This is one of the reasons which results in choking the dockets in courts”
AOR Randhir Kumar Ojha represented the Petitioner.
The Petitioner was employed as an Examiner with BSNL since 1977. In 1997, the BSNL issued him a charge sheet for misconduct due to his frequent and prolonged absence from duty, without prior permission or intimation. Following a departmental inquiry, the Petitioner was found guilty and was removed from service.
The Petitioner raised an industrial dispute, however, his dismissal was upheld. It ruled that his absence qualified as misconduct as these were “habitual” and without prior permission.
After a long history of “forum shopping exercise” by the Petitioner, the Supreme Court noted that the Petitioner jumped from one forum to another, both legal and administrative, agitating his grievance repeatedly, despite the same being well-settled through reasoned orders.
The Bench underscored the right to access the courts as a cornerstone of democracy. “However, this right is not absolute and must be exercised responsibly. When litigants, like the petitioner before us, engage in forum shopping, file repetitive and meritless pleas, and deliberately delay proceedings, they erode the very foundation of our legal system,” it remarked.
“Such type of litigants are not only polluting the stream of justice but putting hurdles in its dispensation to others. The precious judicial time which the petitioner has wasted, could very well be used for taking up the cases of other litigants who are waiting for justice. In fact these types of litigants are choking the system of the court, which is resulting in delays in decision of other cases. It is also the duty of the Courts at different levels to curb such type of litigation so that more time is available for dealing with genuine litigation,” the Court observed.
Consequently, the Court held, “In view of the above discussions, we find no merit in this Special Leave Petition, hence, the same is dismissed. As there is no merit in the petition, we don’t deem it appropriate to even condone the delay. Hence, the application for condonation of delay is also dismissed…we are inclined to impose a cost of ₹ 1,00,000 /- (Rupees One Lakh) against the petitioner”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.
Cause Title: Pandurang Vithal Kevne v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1051)
