Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and Judicial Activism

At a Glance

• What it is Litigation by or for those who cannot approach the court themselves
• Introduced in India Early 1980s; Krishna Iyer and Bhagwati were pioneers
• Basis Relaxed locus standi under Articles 32 and 226
• Called The most popular form of judicial activism
• Exam link UPSC Prelims, Polity: Judicial Review

Where Does It Fit?

This is the last topic of the category on Judicial Review. PIL originated and developed in the USA in the 1960s to provide legal representation to unrepresented groups. In India it is closely related to judicial activism and is its most popular manifestation.

Meaning

The introduction of PIL in India was facilitated by the relaxation of the traditional rule of locus standi, under which only the person whose rights are infringed can move the court. Under PIL, any public-spirited citizen or social organisation can move the court to enforce the rights of persons who, because of poverty, ignorance or disadvantage, cannot approach the court themselves. Any member of the public having sufficient interest can approach the court for enforcing the rights of others and redressal of a common grievance. PIL is also called Social Action Litigation, Social Interest Litigation and Class Action Litigation. Its purposes are the vindication of the rule of law, effective access to justice for the weaker sections, and meaningful realisation of Fundamental Rights.

Features

1. It is a strategic arm of the legal aid movement, bringing justice to the poor.
2. It differs from traditional adversarial litigation between two parties.
3. It is brought to promote and vindicate public interest, not to enforce one individual’s right.
4. It demands that violations of rights of large numbers of disadvantaged people not go unnoticed.
5. It is a co-operative effort of the petitioner, the State and the court.
6. It is undertaken to redress public injury and enforce public duty.
7. The court’s role is more assertive and creative.
8. The court has procedural flexibility but must follow judicial procedure.
9. There is no determination of individual rights.

Scope and Principles

In 1988 the Supreme Court formulated guidelines for treating letters or petitions as PIL, modified in 1993 and 2003. Ordinarily entertained: bonded labour; neglected children; non-payment of minimum wages and exploitation of casual workers; petitions from jails on harassment, premature release and speedy trial; petitions against police for refusing to register a case, harassment and custodial death; atrocities on women; harassment of SCs, STs and backward classes; environmental pollution, ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, heritage, forests and wildlife; petitions from riot victims; and family pension. Not entertained as PIL: landlord-tenant matters; service matters, pension and gratuity; complaints against government departments and local bodies except the listed ones; admission to medical and educational institutions; and petitions for early hearing of pending cases.

The Court can treat a letter or telegram as PIL and relax procedural law and pleadings; it can relax locus standi; it may appoint commissions to find facts; but ordinarily it will not transgress into policy, and purely private disputes cannot be agitated as PIL.

Guidelines Against Misuse and Link to Activism

The Supreme Court has warned that PIL should not become ‘Publicity Interest Litigation’, ‘Politics Interest Litigation’ or ‘Private Interest Litigation’, observing that it is not a pill or a panacea for all wrongs. Its guidelines for checking misuse include encouraging genuine and bona fide PIL and curbing those filed for extraneous reasons; each High Court framing rules for PIL; verifying the petitioner’s credentials and the correctness of the petition; ensuring substantial public interest is involved; giving priority to petitions of larger public interest, gravity and urgency; ensuring there is no personal gain or oblique motive; and discouraging petitions by busybodies by imposing exemplary costs.

PIL is the first aspect of judicial activism, where courts issue directions to government authorities to protect rights and public interest. The second aspect is the expansion of Articles 14, 19 and 21. Together they have been described as the activators and reach of an activist judiciary, with groups including civil rights, consumer, bonded labour, environmental, women’s and children’s rights activists, as listed by Upendra Baxi.

Why Is This Topic Important?

• Current relevance PIL features regularly in news and Mains
• Locus standi Key concept
• Guidelines Both scope and misuse are asked

What Came Next?

The next category covers Subordinate Courts, beginning with the appointment of district judges.

Key People and Terms

• Locus standi Standing to sue
• PIL Public Interest Litigation
• Bona fide In good faith
• Busybody Petitioner with no real interest
• Exemplary costs Heavy costs to deter abuse

Exam Corner

Mains Angle

Questions on this topic usually ask about the benefits and misuse of PIL. Use these points to add depth.

• Access to justice For the poor and disadvantaged
• Procedural flexibility Letters treated as petitions
• Misuse Publicity and private interest
• Judicial overreach Policy matters