< Previous | Contents | Next >
The Supreme Court evolved the following principles in regard to PIL3 :
1. The Court in exercise of powers under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution can entertain a petition filed by any interested person in the welfare of the people who are in a disadvantaged position and thus not in a position to knock the doors of the Court. The Court is constitutionally bound to protect the Fundamental Rights of such disadvantaged people and direct the State to fulfil its constitutional promises.
2. When the issues of public importance, enforcement of the fundamental rights of large number of people vis-a-vis the constitutional duties and functions of the State are raised, the court treat a letter or a telegram as a PIL. In such cases, the court relaxes the procedural laws and also the law relating to pleadings.
3. Whenever injustice is meted out to a large number of people, the court will not hesitate to step in to invoke Articles
14 and 21 of the Constitution of India as well as the International Conventions on Human Rights which provide for a reasonable and fair trial.
4. The common rule of locus standi is relaxed so as to enable the court to look into the grievances complained on behalf of the poor, deprived, illiterate and the disabled who cannot vindicate the legal wrong or legal injury caused to them for violation of any constitutional or legal right.
5. When the Court is prima facie satisfied about violation of any constitutional right of a group of people belonging to the disadvantaged category, it may not allow the State or the Government from raising the question as to the maintainability of the petition.
6. Although procedural laws apply on PIL cases, the question as to whether the principles of res judicata4 or principles analogous thereto would apply depend on the nature of the petition and also facts and circumstances of the case.
7. The dispute between two warring groups purely in the realm of private law would not be allowed to be agitated as a PIL.
8. However, in an appropriate case, although the petitioner might have moved a Court in his private interest and for redressal of the personal grievances, the Court in furtherance of the public interest may treat it necessary to enquire into the state of affairs of the subject of litigation in the interest of justice.
9. The Court in special situations may appoint Commission or other bodies for the purpose of investigating into the allegations and finding out facts. It may also direct management of a public institution taken over by such Commission.
10. The Court will not ordinarily transgress into a policy. It shall also take utmost care not to transgress its jurisdiction while purporting to protect the rights of the people from being violated.
11. The Court would ordinarily not step out of the known areas of judicial review. The High Court although may pass an order for doing complete justice to the parties, it does not have a power akin to Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
12. Ordinarily the High Court should not entertain a writ petition by way of PIL questioning constitutionality or validity of a statute or a statutory rule.