Delhi High Court expresses shock at govt making false claims before court with impunity; refers plea for National Litigation Policy to PIL Bench

The Delhi High Court has expressed shock at the number of false claims/defences raised by the government in various cases stating that the same is done with impunity since there is no accountability of any government officer raising such claims (Hajara & Ors. v. Government of India).

Courts seldom take action against such officers raising false claims, Justice JR Midha said, while referring a plea seeking implementation of the National Litigation Policy to the PIL Bench.

"All these cases shocked the conscience of this Court. It appears that the false claims are raised with impunity because there is no accountability of any Government officer for raising the false claims and Courts seldom take any action against the person concerned for raising false claims/ defences," the order said.

The Court also urged the government to take action officers responsible for making such false claims in court.

"This Court is of the prima facie view that whenever a false claim is raised by the Government, it causes immense injustice to the litigant seeking justice; it also puts unnecessary burden on the Court and the Government also suffers but the concerned officer who has raised the false claim, does not suffer any action. If the facts given by the officers are found to be false/incorrect by the Court, the Government shall consider taking action and the copy of the judgment be kept in the ACR file of the officer. This will ensure that the officer is held accountable for the actions taken by him in the Court case," the Court directed.

The Court found that there was no National Litigation Policy in place at present, despite announcements made by the government on the same in 2010.

It also took note that as per statistics available on Legal Information Management & Briefing System (LIMBS), web-based portal set up by the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, 4,79,236 cases in which the government was a party, as well as 2,055 cases for compliance and 975 cases of contempt were pending as on June 8, 2021. Further, the Finance Ministry has the highest number of cases (1,17,808), whereas Railways has the second highest pendency, with 99,030 cases.

Justice Midha then went on to peruse the cases in which the government had made false claims to the High Court.

In one such case, involving the death of three people who were sleeping on the pavement outside a railway station, the Railway Claims Tribunal had granted compensation to the families of the victims. As per the record produced before the Court, the Senior Divisional Operational Manager (Coaching) had asked the DGM (Law) to make an attempt to avoid the FIR being followed up by the High Court and to ensure that the role of Government of NCT of Delhi should be eliminated.

The noting shocked the conscience of the Court, which proceeded to grant compensation of Rs.18 lakh to the petitioners.

In the present case, Senior Advocate AS Chandhiok, who was appointed as Amicus Curiae in the Railways case, made submissions on accountability in government litigation. He stated that indifference of the governments has been compelling citizens to approach courts in search of relief. Thus, governments/Public Sector Undertakings enjoy the distinction of being the largest litigants before the courts.

The Amicus Curiae further submitted that the Thirteenth Finance Commission, had noted the necessity of all state governments to frame state litigation policies aimed at facilitating responsible litigation. Such a policy will include steps to review existing cases and withdraw cases identified as frivolous and vexatious.

The Court also took note of a National Litigation Policy that was formulated in 2010, which was reviewed in 2015. The same was highlighted by the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh, in which it was observed,

“The website of the Department of Justice shows that the National Litigation Policy, 2010 is being reviewed and formulation of the National Litigation Policy, 2015 is under consideration. When this will be finalized is anybody's guess. There is also an Action Plan to Reduce Government Litigation which was formulated on 13th June 2017.”

During the hearing, Central Government Standing Counsel Kirtiman Singh informed the Court that there was no litigation policy of the government at present, and that the National Litigation Policy, 2010 was never implemented.

After taking the submissions on record, the Court proceeded to list the matter before the PIL Bench, subject to the directions of the Chief Justice, on July 15.

[Read Order]