RESPONSE PAPER TO UPENDRA BAXI’S TAKING SUFFERING SERIOUSLY

ARTICLE:

The author initially discusses about the Supreme Court of India and its establishment and its
evolution after the post emergency period and all those people who can’t afford the legal aid in
the judiciary system as the court tends to be expensive for the poor public people Throughout
this paper, the author uses the term "social action litigation" (SAL) in preference to the more
rethink the term "public interest litigation" (PIL). The label PIL has slipped into Indian juridical
diction as effortlessly as all Anglo-American conceptual borrowings readily do. But while labels
can be borrowed, history cannot be. The PIL represents for America a distinctive phase of socio-
legal development for which there is no counterpart in India; and the salient characteristics of its
birth, growth and, possibly, decay are also distinctive to American history. When PIL was
introduced it changed the system in favor of the public for easy judicial proceedings. The author
Upendra Baxi called this “a remarkable development of the Indian appellate judiciary”, by this
the author further tries to explain about contributory influence to the social action litigation
(SAL) were basically the judicial populism, emergency populism etc. he further calls the court a
“support base and moral authority in the nation at time when other institutes of governance are
facing a legitimate crisis”. The basic common idea of PIL is that it is taking suffering seriously
of the poor people and seeks a remedy for them. The article discusses about the further aspects
and the applications of the social and political conflicts in the system that has to be tackled. Prof.
Upendra Baxi says how people of different classes flock to the court seeking justice. He says”
they come with unusual problems seeking extraordinary remedies”. People of different classes
who have been oppressed for such a long time come to the court to seek remedies for problem.
He further told that all lawyers should concentrate on legal problems and remedies rather than
thinking of fees and earning though the legal issue.

FRIVOLOUS PUBLIC INTREST LITIGATION:

PIL was a rule of law declared by the court of record. However , the petition should be filed only
for public interest in the court and not for a frivolous litigation for pecuniary gain. In
kalyaneshwari v. union of India, was cited by the court for the misuse of PIL .

CONCLUSION:

It was the article which discusses about the usefulness of PIL’s and its effect in the Indian
judicial system and its providing of remedies for the poor. Thus I would like to conclude that it is
PIL has really taken the sufferings seriously.

THANK YOU SUBMITTED BY

ABHISHEK.S

BC019002