Karnataka High Court 
Litigation News

Karnataka High Court slaps ₹1 lakh costs on litigant who filed PIL for 'Government Transformation Bill'

The Court said that PILs are not meant for litigants to vent personal ideas and advised the litigant to read the Constitution.

Megha Menon

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition which sought directions for the State government to propose and discuss a bill drafted by the petitioner, dubbed the Karnataka Government Transformation Bill, 2025 [Murali Krishna Brahmandam v. Chief Secretary to the State of Karnataka and ors].

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakru and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar also imposed costs of ₹1 lakh on the petitioner, after observing that the PIL jurisdiction is not meant for litigants to vent personal ideas.

"The present PIL petition (does not show a violation of any statutory provision) or fundamental rights. (PIL jurisdiction) is not for the purpose of litigants to vent their personal ideas," the Court said, while dismissing the plea.

The Bench opined that such PILs filed without genuine public interest are unnecessarily burdening the courts.

It advised the petitioner to read the Constitution of India as well.

Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru & Justice Ramachandra D Huddar

The petitioner, Murali Krishna Brahmandam, had urged the Court to direct the principal secretaries, secretaries, and special secretaries of Karnataka’s 34 Ministries and 44 Departments to discuss and propose a bill he called the Karnataka Government Transformation Bill, 2025.

The petitioner had claimed that this bill, which was drafted by him, could improve governance in the State and reduce government spending, waste, and burdens by finding smarter, more reliable alternatives to various problems rather than by relying only on Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and Members of Parliament (MPs).

The petitioner said that he was a political economist who aimed to bring about a corruption-proof, social impact legislation, which could optimize the relationship between the Constitution, the government, businesses and individuals.

He added that his plea sought to to tackle unresolved problems that people face on daily basis due to gaps in the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024.

The Court, however, found the petition to be misconceived and dismissed it with costs.

Bihar electoral roll revision case in Supreme Court: LIVE UPDATES

NCLAT Chennai member recuses after saying retired HC judge contacted him for favourable order

Kerala High Court rejects plea by BJP's Shone George for documents of SFIO probe against CM's daughter

Sale of IP Addresses: A Legal and Commercial Perspective

Dileep actress assault case: Kerala High Court seeks sessions court report on delay in trial

SCROLL FOR NEXT