Public Interest Lawyering

Meaning
• Public interest lawyering is a process of legal empowerment
aimed at capacity building of everyday people towards using
the law and institutions to bring about social change.
• In public interest lawyering, general people and community
takes the lead in an active process while working hand in hand
with lawyers.
• It is a process that requires the participation of the affected
community from onset. Public interest lawyering bridges the
paternalistic gap that exist between the lawyer and the end
users of the laws within our communities, whereby the
communities are disregarded in the articulation of legal issues
surrounding them.
• Today we understand that the significance of legal
empowerment especially towards poverty reduction can be
seen with the established link between legal rights and
poverty.
• It is therefore the moral duty of lawyers to teach and
educate the public about the law and how to use the law to
achieve common good that will positively impact on all the
people with the same characteristics.
• The role of lawyers as agents of change and builders of civil
society ought to be made apparent from beginning just as
medical doctors have the underlining principle of saving life.
 Historical Background
• Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere- Martin Luther King, Jr.

• Judiciary, being the sentinel of constitutional statutory rights of citizens has

a special role to play in the constitutional scheme. It can review legislation
and administrative actions or decisions on the anvil of constitutional law.
• For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme
Court or the High Courts directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these
courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation,
however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of
millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty,
illiteracy and ignorance.
• The Supreme Court of India, pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man.
• Till 1960s and seventies, the concept of litigation in India was still in its
rudimentary form and was seen as a private pursuit for the vindication of
private vested interests.
• Litigation in those days consisted mainly of some action initiated and
continued by certain individuals, usually, addressing their own
grievances/problems. Thus, the initiation and continuance of litigation was the
prerogative of the injured person or the aggrieved party.
• Even this was greatly limited by the resources available with those individuals.
There were very little organized efforts or attempts to take up wider issues
that affected classes of consumers or the general public at large.
• However, these entire scenario changed during Eighties with the Supreme
Court of India led the concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL). The Supreme
Court of India gave all individuals in the country and the newly formed
consumer groups or social action groups, an easier access to the law and
introduced in their work a broad public interest perspective.
• 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.
• In Indian law, public interest litigation means litigation for the protection of
the public interest. It is litigation introduced in a court of law, not by the
aggrieved party but by the court itself or by any other private party.
• It is not necessary, for the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction, that the person
who is the victim of the violation of his or her right should personally
approach the court. 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. Such cases may occur when the victim does
not have the necessary resources to commence litigation or his freedom to
move court has been suppressed or encroached upon.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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 and was initiated
inRaihvaiy vs. Union of India, wherein an
unregistered association of workers was
permitted to institute a writ petition under
Article 32 of the Constitution for the redress
of common grievances.
• The first reported case of PIL, in 1979, focused on the
inhuman conditions of prisons and under trial prisoners.
• In Hussainara Khatoon vs. State of Bihar, the PIL was filed
by an advocate on the basis of the news item published
in the Indian Express, highlighting the plight of thousands
of under trial prisoners languishing in various jails in
Bihar. These proceeding 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 by Justice P.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 or the Supreme Court 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 executed in 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 public are at stake.
 Justice P.N. Bhagawati articulated the concept of PIL

• “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 1981, the case of Anil Yadav vs. State of Bihar,exposed the
brutalities of the Police. About 33 suspected criminals were blinded
by the police in Bhagalpur jail in Bihar through putting the acid into
their eyes and then eyes were burnt. The Supreme Court quashed the
trial of blinded persons, condemned the police barbarity in strongest
terms and directed the Bihar government to bring the blinded
persons to Delhi for medical treatment at the state’s expense.
• The Court declared free legal aid as a fundamental right as an aspect
of right to life and personal liberty. The human rights of prisoners
subject to torture,victims of police excesses,inmates of protective
homesand mental asylums,bondedand child labour,victims of sexual
harassment and earthquake victims and many other have been
protected by the Supreme Court.
• Public Interest Litigation is meant for enforcement of
fundamental and other legal rights of the people who
are poor, weak, ignorant of legal redressal system or
otherwise in a disadvantageous position, due to their
social or economic background. Such litigation can be
initiated only for redressal of a public injury,
enforcement of a public duty or vindicating interest of
public nature. It is necessary that the petition is not
filed for personal gain or private motive or for other
extraneous consideration and is filed bona fide in public
interest.
• The following are the subjects which may be litigated under the head of Public
Interest Litigation:-
1. The matters of public interest:-
a. bonded labour matters,
b. matters of neglected children,
c. exploitation of casual labourers and non-payment of wages to them (except in
individual cases),
d. matters of harassment or torture of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Economically Backward Classes, either by co-villagers or by
police,
e. matters relating to environmental pollution, disturbance of ecological balance,
drugs, food adulteration, maintenance of heritage and culture, antiques, forests and
wild life,
f. petitions from riot victims and
g. other matters of public importance.
• 2. The matters of private nature:-
a. threat to or harassment of the petitioner by private
persons,
b. seeking enquiry by an agency other than local police,
c. seeking police protection,
d. landlord tenant dispute,
e. service matters,
f. admission to medical or engineering colleges,
g. early hearing of matters pending in High Court and
subordinate courts and are not considered matters of
public interest.
• 3. Letter Petitions:-
a. Petitions received by post even though not in public interest can be
treated as writ petitions if so directed by the Hon’ble Judge nominated
for this purpose.
b. Individual petitions complaining harassment or torture or death in
jail or by police, complaints of atrocities on women such as
harassment for dowry, bride burning, rape, murder and kidnapping,
complaints relating to family pensions and complaints of refusal by
police to register the case can be registered as writ petitions, if so
approved by the concerned Hon’ble Judge.
c. If deemed expedient, a report from the concerned authority is called
before placing the matter before the Hon’ble Judge for directions. If so
directed by the Hon’ble Judge, the letter is registered as a writ petition
and is thereafter listed before the Court for hearing.
• “Public Interest Litigation”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. 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 the public at large.
• According to 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 the public or class of the
community have pecuniary interest or some interest by
which their legal rights or liabilities are affected. It does
not mean anything so narrow as mere curiosity, or as
the interests of the particular localities, which may be
affected by the matters in question. Interest shared by
citizens generally in affairs of local, state or national
government...”
• Public Interest Litigation's explicit purpose is to
alienate the suffering off all those who have borne the
brunt of insensitive treatment at the hands of fellow
human being. Transparency in public life & fair judicial
action are the right answer to check increasing
menace of violation of legal rights. Traditional rule was
that the right to move the Supreme Court is only
available to those whose fundamental rights are
infringed.But this traditional rule was considerably
relaxed by the Supreme Court in its further rulings :-
• 1. Peoples Union for Democratic Rights vs.
Union of India.
The court now permits Public Interest Litigation
or Social Interest Litigation at the instance of
"Public Spirited Citizens" for the enforcement
of constitutional & legal rights of any person or
group of persons who because of their socially
or economically disadvantaged position are
unable to approach court for relief.
• 2. Judges Transfer Case
Court held Public Interest Litigation can be
filed by any member of public having sufficient
interest for public injury arising from violation
of legal rights so as to get judicial redress. This
is absolutely necessary for maintaining Rule of
law and accelerating the balance between law
and justice.
• 3. Shiram Food & Fertilizer Case
Through Public Interest Litigation, directed the
Co. Manufacturing hazardous & lethal
chemical and gases posing danger to life and
health of workmen & to take all necessary
safety measures before re-opening the plant.
• 4. 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.
• Parmanand Katara vs. Union of India
• Council For Environment Legal Action vs.
Union of India
• State vs. Union of India
• Kapil Hingorani vs. State of Bihar
• Centre for Enquiry into Health & Allied
Themes (CEHAT) vs. Union of India
 Aspects of Public Interest Litigation
• (a) Remedial in Nature

Remedial nature of PIL departs from traditional locus standi

rules. 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 had changed the procedural nature of the Indian
law into dynamic welfare one. Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs.
Union of India, Unni Krishnan vs. State of A.P., etc. were the
obvious examples of this change in nature of judiciary.
• (b) 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. PIL is a modified form of class action.
• (c) 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.
• (d) Non-adversarial Litigation

In the words of Supreme Court in People’s Union for

Democratic Rights vs. Union of India, “We wish to point
out with all the emphasis at our command that public
interest litigation…is a totally different kind of litigation
from the ordinary traditional litigation which is
essentially of an adversary character where there is a
dispute between two litigating parties, one making
claim or seeking relief against the other and that other
opposing such claim or resisting such relief.”