1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SOU MOTU P.I.L. NO. 181 OF 2009 Chairperson, Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission, Mumbai .. Petitioner. V/s. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra .. Respondent. --- Mr. V.P. Patil for the Petitioner. Mr. S.R. Nargolkar, AGP for the State. --- CORAM : J. N. PATEL AND A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 10TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. : 1. A letter dated 3rd August, 2009 addressed to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, High Court, Bombay, by the Chairperson of the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission came to be treated as a public interest litigation on the administrative side by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice. Thereafter, the matter was listed before the first court and notice was issued to the Respondent -State. The Respondent- State has tendered an Affidavit of Mr. Prem Krishan Jain, Principal Secretary (Special), Home Department, Govt. of 2 Maharashtra to which rejoinder has been filed by Shri Kshitij R. Vyas, the Chairperson of the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission, Mumbai. 2. Prima facie, we find that this litigation pertains to the terms and conditions of the services of the Chairman and Members of the State Human Rights Commission, which are governed by the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission Rules, 2000. The Supreme Court of India has laid down guidelines for regulations of a public interest litigation before the Supreme Court and we do not find as to why those guidelines cannot be accepted by this court. The relevant portion of the said compilation of guidelines to be followed for entertaining letters/ petitions is reproduced as follows : SUPREME COURT OF INDIA COMPILATION OF GUIDELINES TO BE FOLLOWED FOR ENTERTAINING LETTERS/ PETITIONS RECEIVED. IN THIS COURT AS PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (Based on full Court decision dated 1.12.1988 and subsequent modifications) No petition involving individual/personal matter shall be entertained as a PIL matter except as indicated hereinafter : Letter-petition falling under the following categories alone will 3 ordinarily be entertained as Public Interest Litigation : 1. Bonded Labour matters. 2. Neglected Children. 3. Non-payment of minimum wages to workers and exploitation of casual workers and complaints of violation of Labour Laws (except in individual cases). 4. Petitions from jails complaining of harassment, for (pre-mature release) and seeking release after having completed 14 years in jail, death in jail, transfer, release on personal bond, speedy trial as a fundamental right. *$ Petitions for premature release, parole etc. not matters which deserves to be treated as petitions u/Article 32 as they can effectively be dealt with by the concerned High Court. To save time Registry may simultaneously call for remarks of the jail Superintendent and ask him to forward the same to High Court. The main petition may be forwarded to the concerned High Court for disposal in accordance with law. Even in regard to petitions containing allegations against Jail Authorities there is no reason why it cannot be dealt with by the High Court. But petitions complaining of torture, custody death and the like may be entertained by this Court directly if the allegations are of a serious nature. (5) Petitions against police for refusing to register a case, harassment by police and death in police custody. (6) Petitions against atrocities on women, in particular harassment of bride, bride- burning, rape, murder, kidnapping etc. • In such cases where office calls for police report if letter petitioner asks for copy the same may be supplied, only after obtaining permission of the Hon'ble Judge nominated by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India for PIL matters. ($ Added based on Order dt. 19.8.1993 of the then Chief Justice of India) (7) Petitions complaining of harassment or torture of villagers by co- villagers or by police from persons belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and economically backward classes. (8) Petitions pertaining to environmental pollution, disturbance of ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, maintenance of 4 heritage and culture, antiques, forest and wild life and other matters of public importance. (9) Petitions from riot -victims. (10) Family Pension. 3. Therefore, it will not be proper for us to entertain this petition as a public interest litigation as it does not fall in any of the above categories highlighted in the guidelines or under public domain. If the petitioner has any grievance in the matter, he can agitate the issue by filing a writ petition or taking recourse to appropriate remedy available to him under the law. 4. We, therefore, dismiss this petition. (J.N. Patel,J.) (A.A. Sayed,J.)