In Brief
The Supreme Court addressed whether the High Court could suo motu stay provisions of the Meghalaya Lokayukta Act, 2014 by scrutinizing eligibility criteria without any formal challenge to constitutional validity. The Court held that suo motu public interest litigation cannot be used to unilaterally test validity of legislative provisions. Constitutional challenge to a statute requires formal pleading with specific averments by an aggrieved party; courts cannot suo motu raise such issues or compare provisions with other legislation to declare them invalid. The Court partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the stay order on the Lokayukta Act provisions while maintaining directions for establishment of the State Human Rights Commission by June 2016.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.