Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India: A Comprehensive Analysis

Introduction

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India represents a transformative shift in the judicial
landscape, enabling citizens to seek judicial intervention in matters affecting the public at large.
Unlike traditional litigation, PIL allows individuals or groups to approach the courts on behalf of
those who are unable to do so themselves, thereby promoting access to justice for marginalized
and disadvantaged communities. This essay delves into the evolution, legal framework, landmark
cases, and the impact of PIL on Indian society, particularly in the context of an LLB
examination.

Historical Context and Evolution

The concept of PIL in India emerged in the late 1970s, influenced by the judicial activism of the
Supreme Court. Prior to this, the legal system was predominantly adversarial, requiring the
plaintiff to have a direct stake in the matter. The turning point came with the case of Hussainara
Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1979), where the Supreme Court took suo motu
cognizance of the plight of undertrial prisoners languishing in jails for extended periods. This
case marked the beginning of PIL as a tool for social justice.

Subsequent cases further cemented the role of PIL in addressing public grievances. The S.P.
Gupta v. Union of India (1981) case expanded the locus standi, allowing any public-spirited
individual to file a PIL. This expansion was pivotal in democratizing access to justice.

Legal Framework and Judicial Interpretation

The legal foundation of PIL in India is rooted in the Constitution, particularly Articles 32 and
226, which empower the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of
Fundamental Rights. Over time, the judiciary has interpreted these provisions expansively to
include PILs.

The landmark judgment in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984) illustrated the
Court's proactive role in addressing issues of bonded labor, even in the absence of a direct
petition. The Court's intervention led to the identification and release of bonded laborers,
showcasing the potential of PIL in effectuating social change.

Landmark PIL Cases and Their Impact

1. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. (1985): This case addressed
the environmental degradation caused by limestone mining in the Doon Valley. The
Supreme Court's intervention led to the closure of 101 mines and initiated afforestation
programs, highlighting PIL's role in environmental protection.
2. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): In this case, the Supreme Court laid down
guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at the workplace, as there was no existing
legislation. The Court's directions led to the formulation of the Sexual Harassment of
Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013.
3. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997): This PIL focused on forest
conservation and led to the establishment of the Central Empowered Committee to
oversee forest-related matters, demonstrating PIL's role in environmental governance.
4. Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009): This case challenged the
constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized consensual
homosexual acts. The Delhi High Court's judgment decriminalized such acts, marking a
significant victory for LGBTQ+ rights.
5. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008): This PIL challenged the
implementation of the 27% OBC reservation in central educational institutions. The
Supreme Court upheld the policy but introduced the concept of the "creamy layer" to
ensure that the benefits reached the truly disadvantaged.

Role of PIL in Social Justice

PIL has been instrumental in addressing issues that affect the marginalized sections of society. It
has served as a vehicle for enforcing Fundamental Rights and has led to significant socio-legal
reforms. For instance, PILs have been filed to ensure the implementation of the Right to
Education Act, the protection of child labor laws, and the enforcement of environmental
regulations.

The judiciary's proactive stance in PIL cases has often led to the formulation of policies and
legislations aimed at addressing systemic issues. This judicial intervention has been crucial in
holding the government accountable and ensuring that the rights of citizens are protected.
Criticisms and Challenges

Despite its successes, PIL has faced criticism on several fronts:

 Judicial Overreach: Critics argue that PILs sometimes lead to judicial overreach, where
the judiciary encroaches upon the domain of the executive and legislature.
 Misuse of PIL: There have been instances where PILs have been filed for personal or
political gains, leading to a backlog of cases and misuse of judicial resources.
 Lack of Accountability: While PILs are meant to address public issues, there is often a
lack of accountability in ensuring the implementation of court orders.

To address these concerns, the judiciary has laid down guidelines to ensure that PILs are filed
bona fide and not for extraneous purposes.

PIL in Contemporary India

In recent years, PIL has continued to play a significant role in addressing contemporary issues.
For example, PILs have been filed concerning the implementation of the Right to Education Act
in private schools, the protection of the Godavari River from pollution, and the rights of
transgender individuals to donate blood .

These cases underscore the evolving nature of PIL and its adaptability in addressing emerging
societal challenges.

Conclusion

Public Interest Litigation in India has evolved into a powerful tool for social change, enabling
citizens to seek judicial intervention in matters affecting the public interest. While challenges
remain, the judiciary's proactive approach and the legal framework supporting PIL continue to
uphold the principles of justice and equality. For law students, understanding the nuances of PIL
is essential, as it not only enriches their legal knowledge but also underscores the role of law in
societal transformation.

References

1. Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1979)

2. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981)
3. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984)
4. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. (1985)
5. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
6. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997)
7. Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009)
8. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008)
9. Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India (1992)
10. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008)
11. Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009)
12. Awaaz Foundation (2006)
13. Santa Khurai (2021)
14. *Rural Litigation
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 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:

o Bonded Labour matters

o Neglected Children
o Non-payment of minimum wages to workers and exploitation of
casual workers
o Atrocities on women
o Environmental pollution and disturbance of ecological balance
o Food adulteration
o 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 in Mumbai
Kamagar Sabha vs. Abdul Thai.
 The first reported case of PIL was Hussainara Khatoon vs. 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.

o 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 by Justice P.N.
Bhagawati in the case of S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India.

o 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.
o 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.
o 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 in Indian Banks’ Association, Bombay & Ors.
vs. M/s Devkala Consultancy Service and Ors held :- “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.
 M.C Mehta vs. Union of India: In a Public Interest Litigation 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 the case
recognized sexual harassment as a violation of the fundamental
constitutional rights of Article 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 has a 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 most progressive social legislations to 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.
 The liberal interpretation of locus standi where 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 the Bandhua Mukti Morcha, the Supreme Court put the
burden of proof 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 the Asiad Workers judgment
case, 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:

o Under Art 32 of the Indian Constitution, in the Supreme Court.

o Under Art 226 of the Indian Constitution, in the High Court.
o 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 filed against a State/ Central
Govt., Municipal Authorities, and not any private party. The
 definition of 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 important instrument of social change and for
maintaining the Rule of law and accelerating the balance between
law and justice.
 The original purpose of PILs have been to make justice accessible
to the poor and the marginalised.
 It is an important tool to make human rights reach those who have
been denied rights.
 It democratises the access of justice to all. Any citizen 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 the problem of 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 with frivolous PILs by
parties with vested interests. PILs today has been appropriated for
 corporate, political and personal gains. Today the PIL is no more
limited to problems of the poor and the oppressed.
 Cases of Judicial Overreach by the Judiciary in the process 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 PIL
cases may 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.
https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/public-interest-litigation-pil/

https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/public-interest-litigation