‘Only aggrieved parties should approach court’

The Chief Justice was taken aback when he was informed that the petitioner was an advocate and not an aggrieved party who has some evidence of gratification against the Vice-Chancellor. “Suddenly an advocate sitting in the Bar room stands up and files a PIL. He has no business to come forward. Let the aggrieved party come to the court,” remarked the Chief Justice.

The counsel for the advocate stated he has filed the PIL since he was a former student of the university. “So you mean to say that he has great love for the institute that is why he wants to denigrate the system and the Vice-Chancellor of the university,” asked the Chief Justice. The counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the Vice-Chancellor has made certain admissions by favouring some of the candidates on the direction of the Chief Minister.

Questioning the basis on which the counsel was making the serious allegations, the court observed: “We will record your statement and ask your client if you are making the statement on his instructions. He can be prosecuted outside the court for defamation. We are not against judicial reviews but its not that anybody can stand up and come to the court demanding anything. Only aggrieved parties should approach the courts. Either withdraw the petition or we will dismiss it with heavy cost,” the Chief Justice said.

Raising eyebrows over the intention of the petitioner, the Chief Justice added: “There is somebody behind you. You can’t be doing this for the love of the institute. There surely is some pressure from a group within the university.”

After receiving a dressing down, the counsel sought time to argue the case. The case has been adjourned for next week.