RESEARCH PROJECT

on
‘PIL as the new concept of litigation’
Submitted to

MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, AURANGABAD

Submitted by

SAMRIDDHI BAMMIDI

B. A.LL.B. (Hons.) Semester-I

Roll No. 2020/BALLB/75
Paper : Legal Methods

Under the guidance of

Ms. Sakshi Gupta
Assistant Professor of Law,
Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad

January 2021

1|Page
 INDEX

Sr. No. Name of the chapter Page no.

1 ABSTRACT 3

2 CONCEPT OF PIL 4

3 ORIGIN OF PIL 5

4 ASPECTS OF PIL 6

5 FEATURES OF PIL 7

6 PITFALLS AND DRAWBACKS 8-9

7 COMPETENT DEFENDANT PARTIES 10

8 GROWTH CONTRIBUTING FACTORS 11

9 LANDMARK CASES 12-14

10 PIL AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SOCIAL CHANGE 15

11 CONCLUSION 16

12 FEEDBACK 17

13 REFERENCES 18

2|Page
 Abstract

Public Interest Litigation is not defined in any statute or act yet it is a well founded concept.
It has been interpreted by judges to consider the intent of public at large.

In Black’s Law Dictionary: Public Interest Litigation means a legal action initiated in a
court of law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which public or class
or class of community have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal right or
liabilities are affected.

This project aims to study the meaning and origin of PIL, aspects of PIL, its legal
history, role and scope, pitfalls and drawbacks, important features, competent
defendant parties, growth contributing factors, case laws (landmark judgements) and
PIL as an instrument of social change.

3|Page
 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, 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.”

In simple words, means, litigation filed in a court of law, for the protection of Public Interest,
such as pollution, Terrorism, Road safety, constructional hazards etc.

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. Although, the main and only focus of such
litigation is only Public Interest there are various areas where a Public interest litigation can
be filed. For e.g.
- Violation of basic human rights of the poor
- Content or conduct of government policy
- Compel municipal authorities to perform a public duty.
- Violation of religious rights or other basic fundamental rights

4|Page
 Origin

The term PIL originated in the United States in the mid-1980s. Since the nineteenth century,
various movements in that country had contributed to public interest law, which was part of
the legal aid movement. The first legal aid office was established in New York in 1876. In the
1960s the PIL movement began to receive financial support from the office of Economic
Opportunity, This encouraged lawyers and public spirited persons to take up cases of the
under-privileged and fight against dangers to environment and public health and exploitation
of consumers and the weaker sections.
PIL in India is more or less an improved version of PIL filed in USA. Justice P. N. Bhagwati
and Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer were among the first judges to admit PILs in court. In 1979
this case Hussaianra khatoon vs. State of Bihar (1979) which was filed through an Advocate,
based on the newspaper article published in Indian Express of the hardship of under trial
prisoners of Bihar prison and a judgment was pronounced by then Justice PN Bhagwati
recognized the right of speedy trial and justice. This case opened a window of thought and
thereafter Courts were flooded with number of cases on different issues. Before PIL, the
locus standi to file the case only belonged to the person whose right was infringed but by the
introduction of PIL the locus standi is given to person acting bonafide and having sufficient
interest in the proceeding of PIL can approach the court to wipe out violation of fundamental
rights or any other injustice.

M C Mehta is a very renowned name in the field of PIL. His contribution in this field
especially in environment is remarkable which helped in the protection of India natural and
cultural treasures like Ganga (MC Mehta vs. Union of India) and Taj Mahal. (M.C. Mehta
(Taj Trapezium Matter) v. Union of India and Ors.) He also advocated for alternate energy in
transport system and his contribution in curbing child labour is also commendable.

PIL has today acquired unprecedented legitimacy and binding power and is acknowledged as
a powerful weapon to combat governmental lawlessness and social oppression. The judicial
messages radiated through PIL cases provide legal resources to launch struggles against
domination and abuses of power. The Indian PIL has grown in the context of political history
of State repression. It emerged as a device to activate judicial power to force the government
to live up to its commitments. PIL is a unique phenomenon in the Indian constitutional
jurisprudence which has no parallel in the world. This technique is concerned with the
protection of the interests of a class or group of persons who are either the victims of
governmental lawlessness, oppression, or social oppression or denied their constitutional or
legal rights and who are not in a position to approach the court for the redressal of their
grievances due to the lack of resources or ignorance or their disadvantaged social and economic
position. The Indian Supreme Court began to identify itself as an institution of last resort when
the other two branches of the government were facing legitimating crisis

5|Page
 Aspects of PIL

1) Remedial in nature: Remedial nature of PIL departs from the traditional

locus standi requirements. It indirectly incorporated the principles enshrined in
the Part IV of the Constitution of India into Part III of the Constitution. By
riding the aspirations of part IV into part III of the Constitution, the Indian
Judiciary had changed the procedural nature of the Indian law into a dynamic
welfare one. Bandhu Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, Unnikrishnan v. State of
A.P., etc were the obvious examples of this change in nature of judiciary.

2) Representative Standing: Representative standing can be seen as a creative

expansion of the well-accepted standing exception which allows a third party to
file a habeas corpus petition on the ground that the injured party cannot
approach the court himself. And in this regard the Indian concept of PIL is
much broader in relation to the American concept. PIL is a modified form of
class action.

3) 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.

4) Non-Adversarial Litigation: In the words of the SC, in People’s Union for

Democratic Rights v. Union of India (AIR 1982 S.C. 1473)

6|Page
 Features of PIL

Through the mechanism of PIL, the courts seek to protect human rights in the following
ways:

1) By creating a new regime of human rights by expanding the meaning of fundamental

right to equality, life and personal liberty. In this process, the right to speedy trial, free legal
aid, dignity, means and livelihood, education, housing, medical care, clean environment, right
against torture, sexual harassment, solitary confinement, bondage and servitude, exploitation
and so on emerge as human rights. These new reconceptualized rights provide legal resources
to activate the courts for their enforcement through PIL.

2) By democratization of access of justice. This is done by relaxing the traditional rule of

locus standi. Any public-spirited citizen or social action group can approach the court on
behalf of the oppressed classes. Courts attention can be drawn even by writing a letter or
sending a telegram. This has been called epistolary jurisdiction.

3) By fashioning new kinds of reliefs under the court’s writ jurisdiction. For example, the
court can award interim compensation to the victims of governmental lawlessness. This
stands in sharp contrast to the Anglo-Saxon model of adjudication where interim relief is
limited to preserving the status quo pending final decision. The grant of compensation in PIL
matters does not preclude the aggrieved person from bringing a civil suit for damages. In PIL
cases the court can fashion any relief to the victims.

4) By judicial monitoring of state institutions such as jails, women’s protective homes,

juvenile homes, mental asylums, and the like. Through judicial invigilation, the court seeks
gradual improvement in their management and administration. This has been characterized as
creeping jurisdiction in which the court takes over the administration of these institutions for
protecting human rights.

5) By devising new techniques of fact-finding. In most of the cases the court has appointed
its own socio-legal commissions of inquiry or has deputed its own official for investigation.
Sometimes it has taken the help of National Human Rights Commission or Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) or experts to inquire into human rights violations. This may be called
investigative litigation.

7|Page
 Pitfalls and drawbacks

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.

Drawbacks:
1. PIL actions may sometime 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. A court order
for the closure of a polluting abattoir may deprive the means of subsistence of the butchers.
The construction of a darn to provide water to the people may deprive other citizens their right
to shelter.

2. 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.

3. Then there is the problem of wilful defiance of judicial directions. Surprisingly, the courts
are unwilling to punish the violators of their own orders through the exercise of their contempt
power. Frequent, defiance of judicial order might also dilute the credibility of the courts.

8|Page
In its early career PIL was understood as a medium to liberate the oppressed and the poor.
Unfortunately, PIL has 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. This technique is
being used to cure all ills affecting the Indian society. It seems that dominant concern of PIL
activism today is to focus the interests of Indian middle-classes. For instance, PIL seeking order
to ban Koran, transmission of T.V. series, implementation of consumer protection law, removal
of corrupt politicians, invalidation of irregular allotment of petrol pumps and government
accommodation, prosecution of politicians and bureaucrats for accepting kickbacks through
Hawala transactions, better service conditions of members of lower judiciary, quashing the
selection of university teachers, are some blatant instances of middle-class interests.

The impact of PIL decisions is hard to measure and requires serious social research. It is
undoubtedly true that in recent years the cause of social justice and emancipation of the
oppressed groups has been advanced in many ways through the device of PIL but the fact that
in some cases PIL has achieved positive success does not certify this technique as a sovereign
remedy to protect the human rights of the poor. Mass production of rights through PIL has
resulted in heightened expectations from the judges that they are available to provide relief
from all miseries and misfortunes. Human rights of the poor and the disadvantaged groups will
be better protected by subjecting PIL to discipline and control and which should be limited
only to the cases focusing on hapless victims of domination and governmental lawlessness.
The overuse of PIL for every conceivable public interest might dilute the original commitment
to use this remedy only for enforcing human rights of the victimized and the disadvantaged
groups.

9|Page
 Competent defendant parties

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. According to Art.12, the term State
includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislatures 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.

Thus, the authorities and instrumentalities specified under Art.12 are -

# The Government and Parliament of India
# The Government and Legislature of each of the States
# All local authorities
# Other authorities within the territory of India or under the Government of India.

In Electricity Board, Rajasthan v/s Mohan Lal, the Supreme Court held that other authorities
would include all authorities created by the Constitution of India or Statute on whom powers
are conferred by law.

However, Private party can be included in the PIL as Respondent, after making concerned state
authority, a party. For example- if there is a Private factory in Delhi, which is causing pollution,
then people living nearly, or any other person can file a PIL against the Government of Delhi,
Pollution Control Board, and against the private factory. However, a PIL cannot be filed against
the Private party alone.

10 | P a g e
 Growth contributing factors

Among, the numerous factors that have contributed to the growth of PIL in this country, the
following deserve special mention:
# The character of the Indian Constitution. Unlike Britain, 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 legislation to be found anywhere in the world
whether it be relating to bonded labour, 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.
# Sensitive judges have constantly innovated on the side of the poor. for instance, in the
Bandhua Mukti Morcha case in 1983, the Supreme Court put the burden of proof on the
respondent stating it would treat every case of forced labour as a case of bonded labour 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 labour 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.

11 | P a g e
 Landmark Cases

CASE – 1
Rural Litigation Entitlement Kendra (RLEK) vs Union of India
This was the very first case of environmental PIL in India. This was the First event of its kind
in the country. A fierce legal battle was fought between the affected residents on the one side
and the rich limestone contractors, powerful industrialists and even the government, on the
other, bringing into sharp focus the conflict between development and conservation.

The case served to emphasize the need to reconcile the conflict between development and
conservation in the larger interest of the country. Voluminous material was placed before the
court and momentous issues arose for decision. The arguments used by RLEK before the
Supreme Court were instrumental in passing of the Environment Protection Act in 1986.

RLEK, after having won the historic environmental battle in the Supreme Court, decided to
harness the energies of the youth to rejuvenate abandoned mines and denuded foothills.
Significantly, the then Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board had withdrawn permission to
these factories to continue production because of their failure to comply with the pollution
control rules. But despite this and the then Prime Minister’s personal intervention, the factories
continued to blow out clouds of smoke affecting visibility in the area and choking the lungs of
residents.

The Supreme Court ordered the closure of these polluting units. The Supreme Court decision
in this particular case set a precedent for enabling residents to file a case against a polluting
unit irrespective of whether it is complying with or violating specifications of the Air Pollution
Act. The polluting units were closed on the court order on the intervention of RLEK.

In this case supreme court acted immediately and prohibited the mining operations with a view
to determine if the mines were operated with the safety standards. It appointed the Bhargava
Committee to assess the total effects of the mines in the ecology of the area. On the
recommendations of Bhargava Committee, the court ordered that these operations in such an
ecologically sensitive area has to be stopped. The court further observed that preservation of
ecology is a task which not only the States but also the citizens must undertake u/A 51 A (g).

12 | P a g e
CASE – 2
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan
Bhanwari Devi, a social worker, was gang-raped in a village in Rajasthan in 1992. The gang
rape was a result of her trying to discourage a family’s efforts of marrying their one-year
daughter. She filed a complaint with police and many NGOs came out in her support. Despite
several efforts, when no justice was served to her, a PIL was filed.

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.”

CASE – 3
Parmanand Katara vs. Union of India
Parmanand Katara, a human rights activist, filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court on the
basis of a newspaper report concerning the death of a scooterist who was knocked down by a
speeding car. 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. Based on the
petition, the Supreme Court held that:-
• Preservation of human life is of paramount importance.
• Every doctor, whether at a government hospital or otherwise, has the professional
obligation to extend his or her services with the expertise for protecting life.
• There should be no doubt that the effort to save the person should be given top priority
not only of the legal professional but also of the police and other citizens who happen
to be connected to the matter.

13 | P a g e
CASE – 4
M.C. Mehta vs Union of India
MC Mehta filed a Public Interest Litigation for escape for poisonous gasses by a plant in in
Bhopal.The court in this case extended the scope Article 21 and 32 of the Constitution of India.
The case is also famous as Bhopal Gas Tragedy.

M.C Mehta filed a PIL under Articles 21 and 32 of the Constitution and sought closure and
relocation of the Shriram Caustic Chlorine and Sulphuric Acid Plant which was located in a
thickly populated area of Delhi.

Factories were closed down immediately as Inspector of Factories and Commissioner

(Factories) issued separate orders dated December 8 and 24, 1985 . This incident took place
only a few months before Environment (Protection) Act came into force, thus became a guiding
force for having an effective law like this.

CASE – 5
M.C. Mehta vs Union of India and Others (1988) 1 SCC 471
(Ganga Water Pollution Case)- Despite of sufficient provisions under the water act, the Kanpur
Mahapalika did not take necessary steps to prevent pollution. SC issued directions to it for the
same. Held rights of people residing near Ganga must be protected against pollution. This case
was against those who were polluting the Ganga river.

The judgement delivered on January 12, 1988 lashed out at civic authorities for allowing
untreated sewage from Kanpur’s tanneries to make its way into the Ganges. The court passed
three landmark judgments and a number of Orders against polluting industries, numbering
more than 50,000 in the Ganga basin, from time to time. In this case, apart from industries,
more than 250 towns and cities also had to set up sewage treatment plants.

600 tanneries operated in a highly congested residential area of Kolkata. The ruling shifted
them out of the city and relocated them to a planned leather complex in West Bengal. The Court
closed down several industries, allowing them to reopen only after setting up effluent treatment
plants and controlled pollution. As a result, millions of people escaped air and water pollution
in the Ganga basin, covering eight states in India.

14 | P a g e
 PIL as an instrument of social change

PIL is working as an important instrument of social change. It is working for the welfare of
every section of society. 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, SC ordered for the release of bonded laborers. 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.

15 | P a g e
 Conclusion

Public interest litigation is a revolutionary stream which helps the common man to reach the
remedy which is beneficial for public at large which was not earlier available to them even
before actual damage is done. Public interest litigation has opened the new window of thought.
We should thank our judiciary who have coined this new concept which is very useful for
public at large because there are many examples present with us which shows that it really
helped the common person in field of pollution, environment, bonded labour, scams corruption
etc . By filing the Public Interest Litigation one can assure the justice to the aggrieved people.

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 an
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 an eminent judge “The judicial activism gets its
highest bonus when its orders wipe some tears from some eyes.”

16 | P a g e
 Feedback

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can be very useful in establishing accountability in India,
but few people use this legal tool. If more people start using PILs to claim their rights and
uphold responsibilities, governance in India can become much more efficient.

Being a 1st year law student, I had a fair idea of what a Public Interest Litigation is but through
this research project, I got the opportunity to learn so much more about the concept of PIL, its
origin, aspects, features, pitfalls and much more. The landmark cases of PIL gave me a deep
insight into public awareness and evolving laws. The growth contributing factors for PIL was
no less an addition to the list.

I would like to thank the learned faculty of Legal Method to give this opportunity to learn and
research about such an interesting topic.

17 | P a g e
References

Ghosh, P. (2013). Judicial activism and PIL in India.

Holladay, Z. (n.d.). PIL in India as a paradigm for developing nations. Indiana Journal of global legal
studies.

Jain, N. (2014, august 8). Importance of PIL in India.

M, D. K. (2017). PIL as an instrument of social change. RAIJMR.

Pooja. (n.d.). A study of PIL in full concept. Legal Service India.

Saraf, A. (n.d.). PIL: genesis and evolution. Legal Service India.

Srivastava, A. (2013). PIL: A new horizon. Singh and Associates.

team, L. (2017, may 15). PIL in India.

Usmani, M. H. (n.d.). PIL: origin and meaning . LSI.

Anant, T. and Singh, J. (2002). An Economic Analysis of Judicial Activism. Economic and Political
Weekly, [online]

Gauri, V. (2009). Public Interest Litigation in India: Overreaching or Underachieving? Policy Research
Working Paper, [online] (5109)

Sahu, G. (2008). PUBLIC INTEREST ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATIONS IN INDIA : Contributions and

Complications. The Indian Journal of Political Science, LXIX(4)

18 | P a g e