NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court slammed a Gujarat Congress MLA for filing a PIL challenging the terms and conditions of land allotment to an MNC for constructing state-of-the-art sports complexes in the state long after the project's completion, and said such misuse of PILs could potentially stall investments in India.A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra , Justice A M Khanwilkar and Justice D Y Chandrachud rejected the appeal filed by Babubhai Meghaji Shah against the Gujarat high court's decision to reject his PIL. In the petition, Shah had questioned the state government's decision to allot land in Ahmedabad to SE TransStadia for the construction of a sports complex that could be converted from an outdoor stadium to an indoor one in six minutes.Appearing for Shah, senior advocate C U Singh said according to the valuation of the land by the revenue department, the state should have got Rs 4 crore as annual lease rent, but the government asked for Rs 25 lakh as rent per year. "The petitioner is not against the stadium but it is not late to recover market rent from the allotted land," he said.The MNC, through senior advocate Harish Salve , pointed out that the agreement between the state government and SE TransStadia, which had signed the MoU in 2009 at the Vibrant Gujarat Summit , provided that the MNC would utilise 2% of its annual gross revenue or Rs 2 crore, whichever was higher, each year for development of sports in the state. He said the agreement was to build sports complexes on the 'hub-and-spoke' model - Ahmedabad was to have the largest complex, with smaller ones at Vadodara, Surat, Rajkot, Jamnagar, Bhavnagar and Bhuj to help scout for talent, provide them training facilities and organise tournaments. Salve said the project was completed and several tournaments were held.Questioning Shah's PIL, the bench said, "How far can courts go? PILs were devised as a m ode to address the grievances of the poor and underprivileged who had no access to justice. But now it has gone on to investigate scams and many other fields. Now, it is used to question whether there should be a sports facility or not. You are a political personality, yet you file a PIL. The project was announced after the Vibrant Gujarat Summit. Were you not aware then? Why was the PIL filed after the completion of the project?"The bench added, "Investors come to build infrastructure with an assured return on their investment. If we interfere in the project after its completion, tell us how will a state attract investment?" It dismissed the petition.