PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION- A DYNAMIC APPROACH

ABSTRACT-

Public Interest Litigation has always played a crucial role in Indian judicial system. It holds immense significance in India due to its pivotal role in promoting social justice, protecting fundamental rights and ensuring governmental accountability. The present study thoroughly expatiate about Public Interest Litigation in India. It also provides the characteristic features of PIL which makes it different for ordinary litigation. This study also explained the guidelines given by Apex Court to secure the virtue of PIL, types of matter admissible in the court as PIL and what will not be considered as PIL petition. Glimpse of certain important and famous cases has been discussed.

INTRODUCTION-

The conventional idea of locus standi serves as the foundation for public interest litigation.

According to Black’s Law Dictionary, Locus Standi means a place of standing or standing in court. A right of appearance in a court of justice, or before a legislative body, on a given question. The main purpose of this concept is to provide access to justice to any person or group of persons who remain underprivileged due to their socially and economically disadvantaged position in the society and they are unable to request redress from the court.

To help such people at the request of “Public Spirited Citizens,” the court grants PIL in order to enforce constitutional and other rights. Hence the courts are regarded as protector and guarantor of fundamental rights.

According to traditional rule of locus standi, right to move the Supreme Court is only available to those whose fundamental rights are infringed. Now, it has been relaxed by the Supreme Court that not only the victims but any other person or group of persons on behalf of the victim can file a suit. A PIL can be filed on various matters relating to crimes, child welfare, environment, wild life and other matters of public importance.

BACKGROUND-

The concept of PIL has been originated and developed in the USA in sixties. After two decades, in the early 1980s this concept started highlighting in India such as in Judges Transfer Case[1] and Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802[2]. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer and P.N. Bhagwati are the progenitors of Public Interest Litigation. PIL is a part of judicial activism because the judiciary has been assigned the active role under the Constitution. The Judges are not expected to sit in an ivory tower like an Olympian closing their eyes uncaring for the problems faced by the society. They need to use their judicial powers to protect the fundamental rights and liberties of the citizens of the country.  Therefore, in order to achieve this mission the judiciary has exercised and evolved its jurisdiction with courage, creativity and circumstances and with vision, vigilance and practical wisdom.[3]Moreover, there are many examples set by the courts by filling cases suo motto. The very first case of PIL was of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. Vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, 1979 AIR 1360 [4]. The case involved prolonged detention of undertrial prisoners without proper trial in violation of their fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Thus, the Supreme Court considered its duty to ensure speedy trial of the prisoners. And the power vested in the Supreme Court has been exercised in the right direction.

IMPORTANCE OF PIL IN INDIA-   

The purpose and objectives of PIL is to protect the interest and well-being of the people in the society. The Constitution of our country has provided us with the fundamental rights and it is the duty of the citizens to protect and safeguard these rights individually and also through class action. If these rights are not preserved then country’s democracy will come in danger. Thus the constitution itself gave us the remedies to fight for our rights. There are significant social, political and economic factors such as poverty, population, unemployment, illiteracy, discrimination, inequality, etc. which restrains a victim to take a legal action and fight for the justice. In this regards Article 39A comes up with directing the state that it must secure equal opportunity to all and provide free legal aid to the needy.

Looking from another prospective, PIL has played major role in safeguarding the environment. There are several cases of environment protection that has been proven to be an effective mechanism for matters such as climate change, protection of wild animals and conservation of forests etc. Examples of such actions are Ganga pollution case of M. C. Mehta vs. Union of India, (1987) 4 SCC 463, Indian Council for Enviro-legal Action vs. Union of India, (1996) 3 SCC 212 case on chemical industries and applicability of the principle of “polluter pays” and so on.

There are certain political factors which also affects the mind of the general public to take legal action. Some of them are nepotism, cronyism, taxation, corruption and bribery etc. There had been number of cases filed around the country for such crimes from the decades but their actions were suppressed most of the time and they were intimidated by such politicians. And even if they were being heard no satisfactory result came out due to lack of evidence. All these creates hardship for a victim to take a stand for himself in such a ruthless society. In a PIL of Common Cause A registered Society vs. Union of India air 1997 SC 1539[5] some Ministers were found guilty of by-passing laws of the country, and misusing their official position. It has now become possible to crackdown such illegal activities through PIL also called Social Action Litigation (SAL).

SIGNIFICANT FEATURES OF PIL-

1. Wider Scope– PIL covers a wide range of issues that affects public interest, such as environmental protection, corruption, human rights violations, consumer rights, and administrative accountability.
2. Promoting Legal Aid– The basic aim of PIL is to ensure free legal aid to the poor and deprived citizens. Courts often waive costs for petitioners in PIL cases. Moreover, various legal services clinics has been set up in the country to educate and guide people of their rights.
3. Judicial Activism– PIL encourages judicial activism, where courts take an active role in ensuring the enforcement of fundamental rights and the protection of public interest. PIL has also expanded the power of judiciary making it more active participant in governance and policy-making, particularly in areas where the executives or legislature may have failed to act.
4. Safeguarding Fundamental Rights-The PIL’s only aim is to protect and safeguard the fundamental rights of a person or group of persons or any community whenever gets infringed.
5. Contribute to Directive Principles of State Policies (DPSP) – The DPSP’s are not enforceable in the court of law. But the legislature may consider the order and the judgment passed by the courts in the public law litigation while framing the laws according to DPSP’s.
6. Speedy Trial– Everyone expects from the court that he will get speedy justice. If a matter of public interest comes before a court which needs to be curbed urgently then unnecessary delay in the court proceedings and adjournment may not serve the purpose of the PIL. Hence, it is the duty of the court to ensure petitioner may get speedy disposal of proceeding.
7. Access to Justice– PIL allows any public spirited individual or organization to approach the court on behalf of those who may not be able to approach the court themselves due to poverty, ignorance, or social disadvantage.

These features collectively make PIL a powerful tool for advancing the interest of marginalized groups, promoting good governance and ensuring accountability in public administration in India.

8. Public Participation– PIL encourages public participation in the judicial process by allowing concerned citizens, NGO’s and activists to raise issues of public importance directly before the courts.

SUPREME COURT GUIDELINES-

Everything has its own advantages and disadvantages. Here too the power vested has been misused and therefore in State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal’s case the Supreme Court had issued following directions to preserve the purity and sanctity of the PIL.

1. The Courts should promote genuine and legitimate PILs while discouraging those filed for unrelated reasons.
2. Before hearing the petition, the court must be completely convinced that there is a significant public interest at stake.
3. Before considering a PIL, courts should first verify the petitioner’s credentials and the accuracy of the petition’s contents.
4. The High Court of each state shall prepare rules for encouraging genuine PILs and discouraging PILs with oblique motive.
5. The court should ensure that petitions with greater public interest, gravity, and urgency are prioritized over others.
6. Before entertaining a PIL, the courts should ensure that it is intended to redress genuine public harm or injury.
7. The court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive, or oblique motive for bringing the public interest litigation.
8. The court should also ensure that petitions filed by busybodies for extraneous and ulterior motives are discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or by implementing similar novel methods to curtail frivolous petitions and petitions filed for extraneous reasons.

KIND OF MATTERS COURT MAY ENTERTAIN AS PIL-

The letter petitions which includes bonded labor matters, non-payment of wages and exploitation of labors. Complaint of death or harassment in jail, seeking release after completing 14 years in jail. Petitions against police for refusing to register a case, harassment by police and death in police custody. Petitions against crimes against women, specifically those involving bride-harassment, bride-burning, rape, murder, abduction, etc. Petitions on environmental pollution, disturbance of ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, preservation of heritage and culture, antiques, forest and wildlife, and other matters of public importance. Speedy trial as fundamental right. Petitions from riot -victims. Family Pension. Neglected children.

It should be noted that petition involving individual/ personal matter are not entertained by the courts such as  Landlord-Tenant matters, Service matter, Pension and Gratuity, Admission to medical and other educational institution, Petitions for early hearing of cases pending in High Courts and Subordinate Courts, Maintenance of wife, children and parents. 

IMPORTANT CASES OF PIL-

In M. C. Mehta vs. Union of India, (1987) 1 SCC 395, a company manufacturing hazardous and lethal chemicals and gases failed to maintain the operation of the plant. Due to negligence of company there was a leakage of chlorine gas from the plant which resulted in death of a person and hardship to workers and residents of the locality. The Apex Court has taken strict actions towards the company and asked to take necessary safety measures. Further, the compensation claim of Rs. 20 lacs has been provided to the victims by the court.

In Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration, 1980 AIR 1579[6], court said, the writ of Habeas Corpus can be used to protect prisoners from inhuman and barbarous treatment, as well as being used to release people from illegal imprisonment. RephraseFor the welfare of children, Lakshmi Kant Pandey vs. Union of India, (1984) 2 SCC 244, a writ complaining of malpractices indulged in by social organizations offering Indian children in adoption to foreign parents. The court has laid down principles and norms which should be followed by the government and various agencies. For health and safety concerns of the public the Kerala High Court in Vincent Panikurlangara vs. Union of India,(1987) 2 SCC 165[7], The petition was approved to ban injurious and harmful drugs. The court ordered the Central Government to compensate and reimburse the people who brought the matter before the court.

Nilabati Behera vs. State of Orissa, (1993) 2 SCC 746, the court found police authority guilty for custodial death of a 22 years old person. The court directed the State for compensation of Rs. 1, 50,000 to the mother of deceased victim.

The court has took numerous subject matter cases and so it took stand for handicapped people in National Federation of Blind vs. U.P.S.C., (1993) 2 SCC 411, the Supreme Court held that the visually handicapped are eligible to compete and write civil services examination in the categories of group A and B posts which are suitable for the handicapped in Braille Script or with the help of a Scribe.

CONCLUSION-

 Public interest litigation in India serves as a vital mechanism for advancing democracy, protecting human rights and promoting equitable development. It empowers citizens to actively engage in shaping legal and social policies, making it an indispensable tool for a vibrant and inclusive democracy. Overall, it remains a powerful tool in the judicial system to secure justice.

REFERENCES-

1. ‘S.P. Gupta vs. President of India and Ors. On 30 December, 1981.’ <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1294854/> accessed 5 July 2024.
2. [1] ‘Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India & Others on 16 December, 1983’ <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/595099/> accessed 6 July 2024.
3. JN Pandey, Constitutional Law of India (59th edn, Central Law Agency 2022).
4. ‘4873.Pdf’ <https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/4873.pdf> accessed 3 July 2024.
5. ‘“Common Cause”, A Registered … vs Union of India & Ors on 28 November, 1996’ <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1729519/> accessed 6 July 2024.
6. ‘Sunil Batra vs Delhi Administration on 20 December, 1979’ <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/778810/> accessed 6 July 2024.
7. ‘Vincent Panikurlangara vs Union of India & Ors on 3 March, 1987’ <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1305721/> accessed 6 July 2024.