PUBLIC INTEREST

LITIGATION
MOHIT BANSAL
  ORIGINATED
PUBLIC
INTEREST
LITIGATION
 USA IN THE 1960S.
 PRODUCT OF THE JUDICIAL ACTIVISM
 EARLY 1980S.
 SOCIAL ACTION LITIGATION (SAL),
 SOCIAL INTEREST LITIGATION (SIL)
 CLASS ACTION LITIGATION (CAL).
MEANING
  ‘LOCUS STANDI’.
RELAXATION
PUBLIC-SPIRITED
CITIZEN  CAN MOVE THE COURT FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE
SOCIAL RIGHTS
ORGANISATION  OF ANY PERSON
 POVERTY
 IGNORANCE
 SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED POSITION
  BONDED LABOUR
EXAMPLES  EXPLOITATION OF CASUAL WORKERS
 JAIL-HARASSMENT,
 PREMATURE RELEASE
 ATROCITIES ON WOMEN,
 HARASSMENT -TORTURE OF VILLAGERS TO SCHEDULED
CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES AND ECONOMICALLY
BACKWARD CLASSES
 ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION,
 DRUGS,
 FOOD ADULTERATION,
 MAINTENANCE OF HERITAGE AND CULTURE,
  As part of a governmental campaign against child marriage,
Bhanwari Devi attempted to stop the marriage of a one year-
old girl in rural Rajasthan. Members of the local community
retaliated first by harassing Bhanwari Devi with threats and
imposing a socioeconomic boycott on her family. Then, on
September 22, 1992, five men raped Bhanwari Devi.
 Bhanwari Devi faced numerous obstacles when she attempted
to seek justice. Frustrated by the criminal justice system’s
Vishaka v. inability to provide tangible remedies, restore the dignity of
the victim, Naina Kapur, a lawyer who had attended Bhanwari
State of Devi’s criminal trial, decided to initiate a PIL case action in the
Rajasthan Supreme Court to challenge sexual harassment in the
workplace.
 The Vishaka writ petition was filed in 1992 in the names of five
NGOs against the State of Rajasthan, its Women and Child
Welfare Department, its Department of Social Welfare, and
the Union of India.
 The Vishaka judgment recognized sexual harassment as “a
clear violation” of the fundamental constitutional rights to
equality, nondiscrimination, life, and liberty, as well as the
right to carry out any occupation.
 The guidelines, directed toward employers, included a
definition of sexual harassment, a list of steps for
harassment prevention, and a description of complaint
procedures to be “strictly observed in all work places for the
preservation and enforcement of the right to gender
equality.”
 It has promoted greater enforcement of women’s rights and
broader application of international law at the high court
level. The case has thus been described as “path breaking,”
“one of the most powerful legacies” of PIL case, and a
“trendsetter” that “created a revolution.
  The Javed litigants challenged the constitutionality of a coercive
population control provision, which governed the election of
panchayat.
 The Haryana Provision disqualified “a person having more than
two living children” from holding specified offices in panchayats.
Javed v. State of The objective of this two child norm was to popularize family
Haryana planning, under the assumption that other citizens would follow
the example of restrained reproductive behavior set by their
elected leaders.
 The petitioners and appellants in the Javed case were individuals
who had been disqualified from either standing for election or
continuing in the office of a panchayat because they had more
than two children.
 Upholding the Haryana Provision as “salutary and in the
public interest,” the Court’s main emphasis was on “the
problem of population explosion as a national and global
issue”
 The Court described the provision as “well-defined,”
“founded on intelligible differentia,” and based on a clear
objective to popularize family planning.
  Many have regarded this case as the first PIL case in India as
well. In this PIL case the attention of the court was drawn
Hussainara to the incredible situation of under trials in Bihar who had
been detained pending trial for periods far in excess of the
Khatoon v. maximum sentence for the offences they were charged
State of Bihar with.
 The court not only proceeded to make the right to speedy
trial the central issue of the case but passed the order of
general release of close to 40,000 under trials who had
undergone detention beyond such maximum period
  The judgement delivered on January 12, 1988, lashed out at
civic authorities for allowing untreated sewage from
M.C. Mehta Kanpur’s tanneries making its way into the Ganges.
vs. Union of  Three landmark judgments and a number of Orders against
India polluting industries numbering more than fifty thousand in
the Ganga basin passed from time to time. In this case,
apart from industries, more than 250 towns and cities have
been ordered to put sewage treatment plants.
 Six hundred tanneries operating in highly congested
residential area of Kolkata have been shifted out of the City
and relocated in a planned Leather Complex in the State of
West Bengal.
 A large number of industries were closed down by the Court
and were allowed to reopen only after these industries set
up effluent treatment plants and controlled pollution.
 As a result of these directions millions of people have been
saved from the effects of air and water pollution in Ganga
basin covering 8 states in India.
  Parmanand Katara, a human rights activist, filed a writ
Parmanand petition in the Supreme Court on the basis of a newspaper
report concerning the death of a scooterist who was
Katara vs. knocked down by a speeding car.
Union of India  Doctors refused to attend to him and directed that he be
taken to another hospital around 20 km away, one that was
authorized to handle medico-legal cases.
  Preservation of human life is of paramount importance.
 Every doctor, whether at a government hospital or
Based on the otherwise, has the professional obligation to extend his or
her services with the expertise for protecting life.
petition, the  There should be no doubt that the effort to save the person
Supreme Court should be given top priority not only of the legal
professional but also of the police and other citizens who
held that:- happen to be connected to the matter.
 PIL filed in Delhi HC against GNCTD (Amendment Act),
which enhanced LG’s powers at cost of elected govt
 The Act, which redefines "Government" as the "Lieutenant
Governor" for Delhi, came into force from April 27 after
being passed by Parliament and receiving the President’s
assent
PURPOSE
  RULE OF LAW,
NECESSARY  FURTHERING THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE
FOR  REALISATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL OBJECTIVES.
 REALIZATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
FEATURES
 STRATEGIC ARM OF THE LEGAL AID MOVEMENT
  ORDINARY TRADITIONAL LITIGATION
DIFFERENT  ADVERSARY
DEGREE OF
FLEXIBILITY  LETTER/ TELEGRAM-PIL.
NO  REDRESSAL OF A COMMON GRIEVANCE.
ADJUDICATION
OF INDIVIDUAL
RIGHTS
 PROMOTE PUBLIC INTEREST.
 The dispute between two warring groups purely in the
realm of private law would not be allowed to be agitated as
a PIL.
  OF
CO-  PETITIONER,
OPERATIVE  STATE
EFFORT  COURT
The Court  The Court will not ordinarily transgress into a policy.
would ordinarily
 It shall also take utmost care not to transgress its
not step out of jurisdiction while purporting to protect the rights of the
the known people from being violated.
areas of judicial
review
CRITICISM
  PUBLICITY
 POLITICS
 PRIVATE
INTEREST  PAISA
LITIGATION  MIDDLE-CLASS
 NOT PANACEA FOR ALL WRONGS.
 MALAFIDE PETITIONS
 'Remove Amitabh Bachchan's Voice from Caller Tune on
COVID-19': PIL Filed in Delhi HC
 The petitioner reasoned that Bachchan himself and his
family members could not "escape" the infection.
 Madras High Court junks PIL seeking compulsory COVID-19
test for candidates contesting elections; bans petitioner
from filing PILs for 1 year
 "It is hoped (in the future) that some degree of
responsibility will be exercised before throwing such
rubbish at the court," the Court said
 Lawyer fined Rs 25,000 for filing PIL to lower marriage age
of men
 In his PIL lawyer Asok Pande requested the Supreme Court
to lower the marriageable age for men from 21 to 18 years.
 In July 2017, the Supreme Court slapped a fine of Rs 1 lakh
on a lawyer for filing a "frivolous" petition and wasting
judicial time. He had asked the court to scrap all colonial
laws and the court to monitor the exercise.
 he Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea that sought
to scrap 24 verses from the Muslim holy book of the Quran.
Calling the plea "absolutely frivolous", the court slapped Rs
50,000 fine on the petitioner Waseem Rizwi, who is former
chief of Uttar Pradesh Shia Central Waqf Board.
 The bench said this in its judgement while quashing the
litigation between two parties initiated by them arising out
of an incident in August 2012.

 The top court observed that the trial judge has a duty under
the Constitution and the CrPC to identify and dispose of
frivolous litigation at an early stage by exercising,
substantially and to the fullest extent, the powers
conferred on him.
WAY  VERIFY THE CREDENTIALS OF THE PETITIONER
FORWARD
  INVOLVES
 LARGER PUBLIC INTEREST
GENUINE AND  URGENCY
BONA FIDE PIL
 NO PERSONAL GAIN,
 NO PRIVATE MOTIVE
 EXEMPLARY COSTS-FRIVOLOUS PETETIONS
ISSUES IN
JUDICIARY
 ACCESSIBILITY:
 PHYSICAL DISTANCE
 AFFORDABILITY.
  3 CRORE CASES THAT ARE PENDING IN INDIA’S
JUDICIARY
HIGH
PENDENCY
OF CASES:
LACK OF
large vacancies of as many as 416 judges in the High Courts
JUDGES: against the sanctioned strength of 1,080,
INEFFECTIVE
FUNCTIONIN  LOK ADALAT
G OF ADR:  GRAM NYAYALYAS
UNDER TRIAL =
PRISONERS:
 LACK OF RESOURCES
 LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN FUNCTIONING:
SECRETIVE IN
APPOINTME  COLLEGIUM SYSTEM.
NTS
  THE POST OF CHIEF JUSTICE SHOULD NOT BE
TRANSFERABLE.
LAW  CONTROL THE LOWER JUDICIARY
COMMISSION  ASSESS THE PERSONS BOTH FROM THE BENCH AND THE
BAR FOR ELEVATION TO THE HIGH COURT.
REPORT
RETIREMENT  70
AGE
 THE STRENGTH OF THE JUDGES SHOULD BE
INCREASED
  MORE BENCHES
HIGH  ESTABLISHED IN ALL STATES.
COURTS
  FOR ALL CASES.
PRESCRIBED
TIME-LIMITS

DIGITAL
TECHNIQUES  JUDICIAL DATABASE
 COURT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
 VIDEO-CONFERENCING
 MORE TRIAL COURTS AT THE INTERMEDIATE
PANCHAYAT LEVEL.
 PERMANENT AND CONTINUOUS LOK ADALATS
 TRAINING
 LIKE BIO-GENETICS, IPR AND CYBER LAWS,
 In which court PIL can be filed?

 A. The High Court

 B. The Supreme Court
 C. Both A and B
 D.None of the above
  Both A and B
Answers – C.
 In which country did the concept of public interest litigation
originated ?

 A. United state of America

 B. South Africa
 C. England
 D.None of the above
  United state of America
Answers – A.
 Who is father of public interest litigation in India? ?

 A. Justice P. N. Bhagwati
 B.Justice Y. V. Chandrachud
 C. Justice A. N Ray
 D. Justice R. S Pathak
Answers – A  .Justice P. N. Bhagwati
 Under which Article public interest litigation is filed in the
supreme court of India?

 A. Article 32 of the constitution of India

 B. Article 322 of the constitution of India
 C. Article 211 of the constitution of India
 D. Article 24 of the constitution of India
Answers -A.  Article 32 of the constitution of India
 Can public interest litigation filed in district court?

 A. Yes
 B. No
 C. In some Situation
 D. With the permission of the court
  No
Answers -B.
 Under which Article public interest litigation is filed in the
High court of India?

 A. Article 326 of the constitution of India

 B. Article 226 of the constitution of India
 C. Article 216 of the constitution of India
 D. Article 246 of the constitution of India
Answers -B.  Article 226 of the constitution of India
  Explain Public Interest Litigation. Who can file it and on
Mains PYQ what basis can it be rejected by theCourt of Law
 Public interest litigation has become an industry of vested
interests, it is a travesty of justice for the resources of the
legal system to be consumed by an avalanche of
misdirected public interest petitions. Critically Analyse
 Public Interest Litigation means a legal action initiated in a
court of law for the enforcement of public interest or
general interest in which the public or class of the
community have pecuniary interest or some interest by
which their legal rights or liabilities are affected.
 In S. P. Gupta v. Union of India 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 or the
Supreme Court seeking redressal against violation of a legal
or constitutional rights of persons who due to social or
economic or any other disability cannot approach the
Court.
  1. SC in justice Loya case said PIL had now become a facade
for people hungry for publicity or those who wanted to
settle personal, business or political scores. Example : A
MISUSE OF petitioner filed a PIL seeking NIA/CBI probe into an incident
of 2015 when a dais being prepared for the Prime Minister
PIL to address the public fell in Raipur in Chhattisgarh, two
years after the incident took place.
 2. The misdirected petitions seriously denuded the efficacy
of the judicial system by detracting from the ability of the
court to devote its time and resources to cases which
legitimately require attention. Example : A lawyer filed the
PIL in his personal capacity in 2017 and said he wanted all
colonial laws to go and the process of abolishing them be
monitored by the apex court without mentioning any
specific details. SC imposed Rs 1 lakh fine on lawyer for
filing frivolous PIL.
 3. SC said that public interest which, upon due scrutiny, are
found to promote a personal, business or political agenda.
Example : The SC termed PIL seeking SIT probe into PNB
 scam as publicity interested petitions since investigation
was already going on in the matter and arrests were being
made.
  1. Persons who were unable to seek access to the judicial
process by reason of their poverty, ignorance or illiteracy
PIL AS A are faced with a deprivation of fundamental human rights.
POWERFUL Public Interest Litigation has developed as a powerful tool
to espouse the cause of the marginalised and oppressed.
TOOL TO
 Example : The Vishaka judgment recognized sexual
SERVE harassment as “a clear violation” of the fundamental
PUBLIC constitutional rights of equality, non- discrimination, life,
and liberty, as well as the right to carry out any occupation.
INTEREST
 2. The essential aspect of the PIL is that the person who
moves the court has no personal interest in the outcome of
the proceedings apart from a general standing as a citizen
before the court. This ensures the objectivity of those who
pursue the grievance before the court.
 Example : In Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar the Court
not only proceeded to make the right to a speedy trial the
central issue of the case, but passed the order of general
release of close to 40,000 under-trials who had undergone
detention beyond such maximum period.
 3. Environmental jurisprudence has developed around the
rubric of public interest petitions. Principles such as the
polluter pays and the public trust doctrine have evolved
during the adjudication of public interest petitions.
 Example : Responding to a PIL filed by environment activist
and lawyer M C Mehta the Supreme Court in 1998 issued a
directive calling for the conversion of all buses, taxis and
three-wheelers to CNG.
 4. Over time, public interest litigation has become powerful
instrument to preserve the rule of law and to ensure the
accountability of and transparency within structures of
governance.
 Example : The Supreme Court in D. C. Wadhwa v. State of
Bihar (1986), held that it is unconstitutional to re-
promulgate ordinances, unless in exceptional
circumstances.
 PIL is a radical procedural innovation that allows the court
to overcome conventional, constitutional norms of the
separation of powers, dilute procedural norms and devise
unique and far-reaching institutional remedies. While it
serves larger public interests, it should not become
"Publicity Interest Litigation" or "Private Interest
Litigation".