Introduction
■ 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 litigationfiled 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:
○ Bonded Labour matters
○ Neglected Children
○ Non-payment of minimum wages to workers and exploitation of
casual workers
○ Atrocities on women
○ Environmental pollution and disturbance of ecological balance
○ Food adulteration
○ Maintenance of heritage and culture
Genesis and Evolution of PIL in India: Some Landmark Judgements
■ The seeds of the concept of public interest litigation were initially sown in India by
Justice Krishna Iyer,in 1976 inMumbai Kamagar Sabhavs. Abdul Thai.
■ The first reported case of PIL wasHussainara Khatoonvs. State of Bihar(1979)
that focused on the inhuman conditions of prisons and under trial prisoners that led
to the release of more than 40,000 under trial prisoners.
○ Right to speedy justice emerged as a basic fundamental right
which had been denied to these prisoners. The same set pattern was
adopted in subsequent cases.
■ A new era of the PIL movement was heralded byJusticeP.N. Bhagawati in the
case of S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India.
In this case it was held that “any member of the public or social action group acting bonafide”
can invoke the Writ Jurisdiction of the High Courts (under article 226) or the Supreme Court
(under Article 32) seeking redressal against violation of legal or constitutional rights of
persons who due to social or economic or any other disability cannot approach the Court.
By this judgment PIL became a potent weapon for the enforcement of “public duties” where
executive action or misdeed resulted in public injury. And as a result any citizen of India or
any consumer groups or social action groups can now approach the apex court of the country
seeking legal remedies in all cases where the interests of general public or a section of the
public are at stake.
Justice Bhagwati did a lot to ensure that the concept of PILs was clearly enunciated. He did
not insist on the observance of procedural technicalities and even treated ordinary letters from
public-minded individuals as writ petitions.
The Supreme Court inIndian Banks’ Association, Bombay& Ors. vs. M/s Devkala
Consultancy Service and Orsheld :- “In an appropriatecase, 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.
M.C Mehta vs. Union of India: In a Public InterestLitigation brought against Ganga water
pollution so as to prevent any further pollution of Ganga water. Supreme Court held that
petitioner although not a riparian owner is entitled to move the court for the enforcement of
statutory provisions, as he is the person interested in protecting the lives of the people who
make use of Ganga water.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan:The judgement of thecase recognized sexual harassment as a
violation of the fundamental constitutional rights ofArticle 14, Article 15 and Article 21.The
guidelines also directed for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
Factors Responsible for the Growth of PIL in India
The character of the Indian Constitution.India hasa written constitution which through Part
III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy) provides a
framework for regulating relations between the state and its citizens and between citizens
inter-se.
India has some of the mostprogressive social legislationsto be found anywhere in the world
whether it be relating to bonded labor, minimum wages, land ceiling, environmental protection,
etc. This has made it easier for the courts to haul up the executive when it is not performing its
duties in ensuring the rights of the poor as per the law of the land.
Theliberal interpretation of locus standiwhere any person can apply to the court on behalf
of those who are economically or physically unable to come before it has helped. Judges
themselves have in some cases initiated suo moto action based on newspaper articles or letters
received.
Although social and economic rights given in the Indian Constitution under Part IV are not
legally enforceable, courts have creatively read these into fundamental rights thereby making
them judicially enforceable. For instance the "right to life" in Article 21 has been expanded to
include right to free legal aid, right to live with dignity, right to education, right to work,
freedom from torture, bar fetters and hand cuffing in prisons, etc.
Judicial innovations to help the poor and marginalised:For instance, in theBandhua
Mukti Morcha,the Supreme Court put the burden ofproof on the respondent stating it would
treat every case of forced labor as a case of bonded labor unless proven otherwise by the
employer. Similarly in theAsiad Workers judgmentcase,Justice P.N. Bhagwati held that
anyone getting less than the minimum wage can approach the Supreme Court directly without
going through the labor commissioner and lower courts.
In PIL cases where the petitioner is not in a position to provide all the necessary evidence,
either because it is voluminous or because the parties are weak socially or economically, courts
have appointed commissions to collect information on facts and present it before the bench.
Who Can File a PIL and Against Whom?
■ Any citizen can file a public case by filing a petition:
Under Art 32 of the Indian Constitution, in the Supreme Court.
Under Art 226 of the Indian Constitution, in the High Court.
Under sec. 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in the Court of Magistrate.
■ However, the court must be satisfied that the Writ petition fulfils some basic needs
for PIL as the letter is addressed by the aggrieved person, public spirited individual
and a social action group for the enforcement of legal or Constitutional rights to any
person who are not able to approach the court for redress.
■ A Public Interest Litigation can be filedagainsta State/ Central Govt., Municipal
Authorities, and not any private party.The definitionof State is the same as
given under Article 12 of the Constitution and this includes the Governmental and
Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the States
and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of
the Government of India.
Significance of PIL
The aim of PIL is to give to the common people access to the courts to obtain legal redress.
PIL is an importantinstrument of social changeandfor maintaining the Rule of law and
accelerating the balance between law and justice.
The original purpose of PILs have beento make justiceaccessible to the poor and the
marginalised.
It is an important tool to make human rights reach those who have been denied rights.
Itdemocratises the access of justiceto all. Anycitizen or organisation who is capable can file
petitions on behalf of those who cannot or do not have the means to do so.
It helps in judicial monitoring of state institutions like prisons, asylums, protective homes, etc.
It is an important tool for implementing the concept of judicial review.
Enhanced public participation in judicial review of administrative action is assured by the
inception of PILs.
Certain Weaknesses of PIL
■ PIL actions may sometimes give rise to theproblemof competing rights.For
instance, when a court orders the closure of a polluting industry, the interests of the
workmen and their families who are deprived of their livelihood may not be taken
into account by the court.
■ It could lead to overburdening of courts withfrivolousPILs by parties with
vested interests.PILs today has been appropriatedfor corporate, political and
personal gains. Today the PIL is no more limited to problems of the poor and the
oppressed.
■ Cases ofJudicial Overreachby the Judiciary in theprocess of solving
socio-economic or environmental problems can take place through the PILs.
■ PIL matters concerning the exploited and disadvantaged groups are pending for
many years.Inordinate delays in the disposal of PILcasesmay render many
leading judgments merely of academic value.
Conclusion
■ 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.