Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Means Litigation Filed in A Court of Law, For The
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Means Litigation Filed in A Court of Law, For The
Social change is the necessity of any society. In India it is done through Public Interest
Litigation. In this article an attempt was made to assess the impact of PIL overIndian Society.
The jurisprudence of PIL is necessary to understand the nature of PIL in India.
Such is the disillusionment with the state formal legal system that it is no longer demanded
by law to do justice, if justice perchance is done, we congratulate ourselves for being
fortunate. In these circumstances one of the best things that have happened in the country
in recent years is the process of social reform through Public Interest Litigation or Social
Action Litigation.
Late 1970s marked discernible shift from legal centralism. Legal pluralism was very apparent
now. It was realized that social conduct was regulated by the interaction of normative
orders, notion of popular justice, community justice, and distributive justice were sought to
be institutionalised, though outside the sphere of the formal legal system and in opposition
to it.
The expression ‘Public Interest Litigation’ has been borrowed from American
jurisprudence, where it was designed to provide legal representation to previously
unrepresented groups like the poor, the racial minorities, unorganised consumers,
citizens who were passionate about the environmental issues, etc.
Public interest Litigation (PIL) means litigation filed in a court of law, for the
protection of “Public Interest”, such as Pollution, Terrorism, Road safety,
Constructional hazards etc. Any matter where the interest of public at large is
affected can be redressed by filing a Public Interest Litigation in a court of law.
Public interest litigation is not defined in any statute or in any act. It has been
interpreted by judges to consider the intent of public at large.
Public interest litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial
activism. However, the person filing the petition must prove to the satisfaction of the
court that the petition is being filed for a public interest and not just as a frivolous
litigation by a busy body.
The court can itself take cognizance of the matter and proceed suo motu or cases
can commence on the petition of any public spirited individual.
Some of the matters which are entertained under PIL are:
Brown provided inspiration to a generation of lawyers who saw law as a source of liberation
as well as transformation for marginalized groups. Courts, mostly federal but state as well,
became involved in a broad range of social issues, including voting and apportionment,
contraception and abortion, employment and housing discrimination, environmental
regulation, and prison conditions. Prison reform litigation illustrates the extent of the
judiciary’s involvement in Public Law cases: after years of taking a “hands off” approach to
prison conditions, courts imposed remedial decrees in 48 of the nation’s 53 jurisdictions.
TECHNICAL DEFINITION OF PIL
The term Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is composed of two words; ‘Public Interest’ and
‘Litigation’.
The words ‘Public Interest’ mean “an expression which indicates something in which the
general public or the community at large has some pecuniary interest, or some interest by
which their legal rights or liabilities are affected.” The word ‘litigation’ on the other hand
means “a legal action, including all legal proceedings initiated in a Court of Law with the
purpose of enforcing a right or seeking a remedy.”
Hence, lexically the expression ‘Public Interest Litigation’ denotes a legal action initiated in a
court of law for the enforcement of public interest where the rights of an individual or a
group have been affected.
Procedure for filing a PIL?
1. Before filing a PIL one has to do the complete research about the issue. When a PIL is
filed concerning many people, the petitioner needs to consult all the individuals and
groups which are affected.
2. Once you are sure of filing a PIL, collect all the vital information and documents as
evidence to support your case. You can argue the case on your own or appoint a
lawyer to argue on behalf of you.
3. It is always advisable to consult a lawyer before filing the PIL. If you are interested in
arguing the case on your own then be prepared to explain the problem and convince
the court in the time you have been allotted.
4. Once the PIL copy is ready to be filed in the High Court, then submit two copies of
the petition to the court. Along with this, one copy of the petition needs to be served
to the respondents in advance. This proof of serving the petition copy to the
respondents has to be affixed in the petition.
If the PIL is filed in the Supreme Court, then five copies of petition need to be submitted to
the court. Respondent is served with the petition copy when the court issues the notice
regarding the same.
As it is said that every right comes with a responsibility, same is with the filing of PILs, yes
you do have a right to file a PIL for the welfare of the public but this doesn’t give you a
license of misappropriating the whole idea behind the introduction of PILs. Already around
60,000 cases are pending in Supreme Court. And around 42 lakh cases are pending in
different High Courts of India and some people come to court to fulfil their POLITICAL
INTEREST in the form of PILs as said by Justice Arun Mishra that “whether the Public Interest
Litigation (PIL) had acquired a new meaning as the “Political Interest Litigation”, he also
made a remark that if “Politically sponsored cases are filed in the guise of a PIL and if such
petitions are not disposed of in the petitioners’ favour, the courts are slammed and the date
of such a judgment is dubbed as a ‘black day for the judiciary”.
The idea of PIL should not be disregarded just because for reason that it had been filed by a
person of any political, corporate or personal connectivity but if any PIL is found to be
frivolous in nature then the courts should slap hefty fines along with some sanctions which
will act as a deterrent in the future and if not done so the efforts of Justices V.R. Krishna Iyer
and P.N. Bhagwati, who are accredited for opening the door of justice for all, will surely go
in vain.
Concept of PIL
According to the jurisprudence of Article 32 of the Constitution of India, “The right to move
the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred
by this part is guaranteed”. Ordinarily, only the aggrieved party has the right to seek redress
under Article 32.In 1981 Justice P. N. Bhagwati in .S. P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981 (Supp)
SCC 87, articulated the concept of PIL as follows, “Where a legal wrong or a legal injury is
caused to a person or to a determinate
class of persons by reason of violation of any constitutional or legal right or any burden is
imposed in contravention of any constitutional or legal provision or without authority of law
or any such legal wrong or legal injury or illegal burden is threatened and such person or
determinate class of persons by reasons of poverty,
helplessness or disability or socially or economically disadvantaged position unable to
approach the court for relief, any member of public can maintain an application for an
appropriate direction, order or writ in the High Court under Article 226 and in case any
breach of fundamental rights of such persons or determinate class of persons, in this court
under Article 32 seeking judicial redress for the legal wrong or legal injury caused to such
person or determinate class of persons.”
The rule of locus standi have been relaxed and a person acting bonafide and having
sufficient interest in the proceeding of Public Interest Litigation will alone have a locus
standi and can approach the court to wipe out violation of fundamental rights and genuine
infraction of statutory provisions, but not for personal gain or private profit or political
motive or any oblique consideration (Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of W. B., (2004) 3 SCC
349).
Supreme Court in Indian Banks’ Association, Bombay and ors v. M/s Devkala Consultancy
Service and Ors., J. T. 2004 (4) SC 587, held that “In an appropriate case, where the
petitioner might have moved a court in her private interest and for redressal of the personal
grievance, the court in furtherance of Public Interest may treat it a necessity to enquire into
the state of affairs of the subject of litigation in the interest of justice. Thus a private interest
case can also be treated as public interest case”.
In Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Commit. And Anr. Vs. C.K. Rajan and Ors, J.T. S.C. held,
“The Courts exercising their power of judicial review found to its dismay that the poorest of
the poor, depraved, the illiterate, the urban and rural unorganized labour sector, women,
children, handicapped by ‘ignorance, indigence and illiteracy’ and other down trodden have
either no access to justice or had been denied justice. A new branch of proceedings known
as ‘Social Interest Litigation’ or ‘Public Interest Litigation’ was evolved with a view to render
complete justice to the aforementioned classes of persona. It expanded its wings in course
of time. The Courts in pro bono publico granted relief to the inmates of the prisons,
provided legal aid, directed speedy trial, maintenance of human dignity and covered several
other areas. Representative actions, pro bono publico and test litigations were entertained
in keeping with the current accent on justice to the common man and a necessary
disincentive to those who wish to by pass the, real issues on the merits by suspect reliance
on peripheral procedural shortcomings… Pro bono publico constituted a significant state in
the present day judicial system. They, however, provided the dockets with much greater
responsibility for rendering the concept of justice available to the disadvantaged sections of
the society. Public interest litigation has come to stay and its necessity cannot be
overemphasized. The courts evolved a jurisprudence of compassion. Procedural propriety
was to move over giving place to substantive concerns of the deprivation of rights. The rule
of locus standi was diluted. The Court in place of disinterested and dispassionate adjudicator
became active participant in the dispensation of justice”.
(c)Citizen standing
The doctrine of citizen standing thus marks a significant expansion of the court’s rule, from
protector of individual rights to guardian of the rule of law wherever threatened by official
lawlessness.
(ii) Forum – The court provides a forum or place to discuss the public issues at length and
providing emergency relief through interim orders.
(iii) Mediator – The court comes up with possible compromises.
The judicial activism gets its highest bonus when its orders wipe some tears from some eyes.
This jurisdiction is somehow different from collective action. Number of PIL cells was open
all over India for providing the footing or at least platform to the needy class of the society.
PIL is working as an important instrument of social change. It is working for the welfare of
every section of society. It’s the sword of every one used only for taking the justice. The
innovation of this legitimate instrument proved beneficial for the developing country like
India. PIL has been used as a strategy to combat the atrocities prevailing in society. It’s an
institutional initiative towards the welfare of the needy class of the society. In Bandhu Mukti
Morcha v. Union of India, S.C. ordered for the release of bonded labourers. In Murli S. Dogra
v. Union of India, court banned smoking in public places. In a landmark judgement of Delhi
Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India, (1995) 1 SCC 14, Supreme Court
issued guidelines for rehabilitation and compensation for the rape on working women. In
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan Supreme court has laid down exhaustive guidelines for
preventing sexual harassment of working women in place of their work.
CRITICISM OF PIL
The debates over the limits of Judicial Activism in the area of PIL, have been vigorous. A
private members bill entitled “Public Interest Litigation (Regulation) Bill, 1996” was tabled in
the Rajya Sabha. The statement of objectives and reasons stated that PIL was misused in the
name of providing justice to the poor sections of the society and also that PIL cases were
given more priority over other cases which led to pending of several “general section cases”
in the court for years. However, the bill was not passed.
Bearing in mind the power and importance of PIL in making the Constitution a living reality
for every citizen and also the efforts channelled through the medium of PIL jurisprudence in
providing justice to the deprived, the process is positively succeeding, following the logic of
its nature. In a country Characterized by numerous “Variable Ethnicity” and religious
diversity, working via the pattern through a comprehensive bureaucracy, a grieved, poor,
deprived citizen does find it hard to seek justice because of economic disability or lack of
“Know-How” or even due to red-tapism. The only option left before the deprived next to a
miracle is a PIL petition.
Conclusion
It would be appropriate to conclude by quoting Cunningham, “Indian PIL might rather be a
Phoenix: a whole new creative arising out of the ashes of the old order.”
PIL represents the first attempt by a developing common law country to break away from
legal imperialism perpetuated for centuries. It contests the assumption that the most
western the law, the better it must work for economic and social development such law
produced in developing states, including India, was the development of under develop men.
The shift from legal centralism to legal pluralism was prompted by the disillusionment with
formal legal system. In India, however instead of seeking to evolve justice- dispensing
mechanism ousted the formal legal system itself through PIL. The change as we have seen,
are both substantial and structural. It has radically altered the traditional judicial role so as
to enable the court to bring justice within the reach of the common man.
Further, it is humbly submitted that PIL is still is in experimental stage. Many deficiencies in
handling the kind of litigation are likely to come on the front. But these deficiencies can be
removed by innovating better techniques. In essence, the PIL develops a new jurisprudence
of the accountability of the state for constitutional and legal violations adversely affecting
the interests of the weaker elements in the community. We may end with the hope once
expressed by Justice Krishna Iyer, “The judicial activism gets its highest bonus when its
orders wipe some tears from some eyes”.
Public Interest Litigation has produced astonishing results which were unthinkable
three decades ago. Degraded bonded labourers, tortured under trials and women
prisoners, humiliated inmates of protective women’s home, blinded prisoners,
exploited children, beggars, and many others have been given relief through judicial
intervention.
The greatest contribution of PIL has been to enhance the accountability of the
governments towards the human rights of the poor.
The PIL develops a new jurisprudence of the accountability of the state for
constitutional and legal violations adversely affecting the interests of the weaker
elements in the community.
However, the Judiciary should be cautious enough in the application of PILs to avoid
Judicial Overreach that are violative of the principle of Separation of Power.
Besides, the frivolous PILs with vested interests must be discouraged to keep its
workload manageable.