We take up public interest issues free of charge: CPIL to SC

An NGO, whose functioning has come under severe scrutiny, today clarified to the Supreme Court that it takes up PILs involving issues of serious public interest free of charge and does not receive donations of any kind.
Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) also set the record straight that senior advocate Fali S Nariman was not involved in any way in veting PILs filed by it and said that media has "wrongly reported" the January 12 proceedings of the court that he was part of sub-committee which decides on PILs to be filed.
Nariman has clarified to the apex court registry through a January 14 letter that he was not involved in vetting PILs filed by CPIL and "in view of the confusion created due to wrong reporting, Nariman has now resigned from CPIL," the NGO said in its written submission, which was mentioned before a bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur.

"Fali Nariman was not a member of the sub-committee which decides on filing of PILs, but he was a founder member and was a member of the governing body of CPIL. It is hereby affirmed that any impression that Shri Nariman had scrutinised the petitions filed by CPIL, including the present petition, is incorrect," it said.
The submissions on behalf of CPIL were signed by five senior lawyers Anil Divan, Shanti Bhushan, Colin Gonsalves, Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan.
The submissions were in response to questions and observations made by the bench headed by the CJI during the January 12 hearing of the 4G case against Reliance filed by CPIL.

In the written submission, the NGO said it has not

received any material from any business rival or competitor in the PIL challenging the grant of 4G licences to Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd (RJIL).
"CPIL was formed precisely for the purpose of taking up PILs in an organised manner purely in public interest. Over the years, CPIL has established its credentials as a genuine public interest organisation by dint of an array of PILs filed before this Court and before the High Court of Delhi.
"CPIL has not solicited any donations. The lawyers who pursue cases for CPIL do it pro bono. Out of pocket expenses, like court fees, photocopying and typing charges, are defrayed from the contributions made by the members. The junior advocates who assist in filing PILs work in the chambers of Prashant Bhushan or Kamini Jaiswal and are remunerated by them personally. They are not paid out of CPIL's funds," it said.

Elaborating on the practice adopted by CPIL for deciding on the PILs that are to be filed in court, it said Bhushan with the assistance of his juniors and after discussions with senior advocate Kamini Jaiswal scrutinises the materials on which a potential PIL is to be drafted.
"If the material comes from a doubtful source, it is examined with suspicion and utmost care. On the basis of the quality of the material, eg. CAG reports, documents obtained under RTI or supplied by whistleblowers, journalists or others, a considered decision is taken to go ahead or not ...
"The majority of the litigation proposals coming to CPIL are rejected, since it is felt that the material is doubtful, or the matter does not raise a major issue of public importance," CPIL said.

With regard to source of information or documents filed by the NGO, it said "the offices of Bhushan and Jaiswal generally view documents coming from non-independent sources with great care, but if the information appears credible and shows evidence of serious harm to public interest which needs intervention by the Court, then the same is appropriately used in the PIL. This is done after a dispassionate and objective analysis about its credibility".