LOCUS STANDI

SUBJECT:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

SUBMITTED TO:- Dr. ALI MOHAMMAD

SUBMITTED BY: - SUNNY KUMAR

6TH SEMESTER
ROLL NO:-1176
-B.A.L.L.B
SESSION:-2014-2019

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Writing a project is one of the most significant academic challenges I have ever
faced. Though this project has been presented by me but there are many people who
remained in veil, who gave their all support and helped me to complete this project.
First of all I am very grateful to my subject teacher Dr. Ali Mohammad, without the
kind support of whom and help the completion of the project was a herculean task
for me. He donated his valuable time from his busy time to help me to complete this
project and suggested me from where and how to collect data.
I am very thankful to the librarian who provided me several books on this topic
which proved beneficial in completing this project.
I acknowledge my friends who gave their valuable and meticulous advice which
proved very useful and could not be ignored in writing the project. I want to convey
a most sincere thanks to seniors for helping me throughout the project.

SUNNY KUMAR
DATE:-

2|Page
TABLE OF CONTENT PAGE NO

1. INTRODUCTION . 04-05

2. MEANING AND CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI 06-16

3. CONSIDERATION OF THE COURT AND CASE LAWS ................16-19

4. CONCLUSION19-20

BIBLIOGRAPHY.........................................

3|Page
1. INTRODUCTION

In law, locus standi means the right to bring an action, to be heard in court, or to
address the Court on a matter before it. Locus standi is the ability of a party to
demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action
challenged to support that partys participation in the case. For example, in the
United States, a person cannot bring a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law
unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the plaintiff is (or will be) harmed by the
law. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff lacks standing to bring the suit,
and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of
unconstitutionality. In order to sue to have a court declare a law unconstitutional,
there must be a valid reason for whoever is suing to be there. The party suing must
have something to lose in order to sue unless they have automatic standing by action
of law. Locus standi, a Latin phrase meaning place to stand refers to whether or
not someone has the right to be heard in court. People may use the term standing
or legal standing to describe this concept. A number of factors can influence locus
standi for a given person or situation and legal standing can vary depending on the
level of the court as well. This term applies to people who want to bring suits,
individuals who want to address the court, and people who want to be heard in the
court. As a general rule, a person has locus standi in a given situation if it is possible
to demonstrate that the issue at hand is causing harm and that an action undertaken
by the court could redress that harm. If these conditions cannot be satisfied, the court
may determine that an issue has no locus standi, and it will not review it. In a simple
example, imagine that a citizen wants to challenge a law. The citizen must first show
that he or she is experiencing harm as a result of the law; people cannot, in other
words, challenge laws just on the principle of the matter, or because they think that
they might harm other people. These individuals must also be able to show that the

4|Page
court could take corrective action such as striking the law down. When the case is
filed, the court could determine that the citizen does indeed have locus standi, and
the case will be heard. The legal system is designed to protect and defend the rights
of citizens. Courts take special care when they think that a case has no standing.
They review the case carefully, consider what may happen if they reject the case,
and issue a ruling only after weighing this information. If courts reject a case, they
also do so out of concerns that if they accepted it, it might set a precedent, or they
might issue a ruling which would not be legally binding or would not stand up to a
future challenge because the case had no standing and thus should not have been
heard at all. Having a case rejected does not necessarily mean that it has no merit. In
the example of a citizen challenging a law above, for example, a law may actually
be illegal or of questionable validity. If someone with standing were to bring the suit,
the court could consider the matter and issue a ruling.1

2. MEANING AND CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI

The word locus is Latin for "place". Locus standi is Latin for place to stand- In
law, the right to bring an action. It is the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court
sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that
party's participation in the case. In United States law, the Supreme Court of the
United States has stated -In essence the question of locus standi is whether the
litigant is entitled to have the court decide the merits of the dispute or of particular
issues. There are three constitutional standing requirements:

Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury - an
invasion of a legally protected interest which is concrete and particularized. The

1
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-locus-standi.htm

5|Page
injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury
could be economic as well as non-economic.

Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct
complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the
defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not
before the court.

Redress ability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable

court decision will redress the injury. Concept and development of the rule of Locus
Standi is clearly stated by a DB of the Hon. High Court of Kerala in Dr. George
Mampilly v. State of Kerala -1984 Law, it is said, is dynamic. Naturally, our
perception of locus standi also has been undergoing transformation. The traditional
conception in regard to locus standi is that judicial redress is available to a person
who has suffered a legal injury by reason of violation of his legal right or. Legally
protected interest by the impugned action of the State or a public authority or who is
likely to suffer a legal injury by such reason. Courts have, during recent years,
evolved a number of exceptions to this rule. Courts have now acknowledged that
where there has been violation of constitutional or legal rights of persons who, by
reason of their socially or economically disadvantaged position, are unable to
approach the court for judicial redress, a member of the public could move the court
for enforcement of such rights of such persons. Members of the public are enabled,
in appropriate cases to come forward to protect the rights of person or persons
belonging to a determinate class who, by reason of poverty, helplessness or disability
or socially or economically disadvantaged position, are unable to approach the court
for relief. This principle has been extended to cases where no specific regal injury is
caused to a person or to a determinate class or group of persons by the act or omission
of State or public authority and injury is caused only to public interest. Where there

6|Page
is a public wrong of public injury by an act or omission by the State or a public
authority which is contrary to the Constitution or to any law, any member of the
public having sufficient interest can maintain an action to or redress such public
wrong or public, injury. Courts have begun to recognize that they exist not merely
to vindicate individual rights but also to vindicate public rights and therefore permit
members of the public to agitate such rights. Any member of the public having
sufficient interest can maintain an action for judicial redress of public injury arising
from breach of public duty or violation of some provision of the Constitution or the
law and seek enforcement of such public duty and observance of such constitutional
or legal provision. Of course, it must be ensured that the person who comes forward
is acting bona fide and not for personal gain or private profit or out of political
motivation or other oblique consideration.2

2.1 Locus Standi has widening the scope of Public Interest Litigation
General rule is that right to move to the court is right whose fundamental right is
violated. The Supreme Court can only exercise the for the enforcement of
fundamental right under Art. 32 of the Indian constitution. In law, standing or locus
standi is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court in sufficient
connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that partys
participation in the case. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff lacks
standing to bring the suit and will dismiss the case without considering the merits
of the claim. 3But the public interest litigations developed the concept of public
interest standing which is a form to widen the scope of the locus standi. Public
Interest litigation demanded for objectivity, forensic skill, procedural gamesmanship

2
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/basic-concept-locus-standi-law-web
3
available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract

7|Page
and socio-legal perception. The Constitution of India recognizes as fundamental
rights many of the individual rights that comprises the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Right. These include the right to life, to equality, to the freedom
of speech and expression and the right to seek judicial redress before the Supreme
Court and High Courts of India for enforcement and protection of these rights.
Though the Constitution of India guarantees equal rights to all citizens, irrespective
of race, gender, religion, and other considerations, and the "directive principles of
state policy" as stated in the Constitution obligate the Government to provide to all
citizens a minimum standard of living, the promise has not been Fulfilled. The
greater majority of the Indian people have no assurance of two nutritious meals a
day, safety of employment, safe and clean housing, or such level of education as
would make it possible for them to understand their constitutional rights and
obligations. Indian newspapers abound in stories of the exploitation by landlords,
factory owners, businessmen, and the state's own functionaries, such as police and
revenue officials - of children, women, villagers, the poor, and the working class.
Though India's higher courts and, in particular, the Supreme Court have often been
sensitive to the grim social realities, and have on occasion given relief to the
oppressed, the poor do not have the capacity to represent themselves, or to take
advantage of progressive legislation. In 1982, the Supreme Court conceded that
unusual measures were warranted to enable people the full realization of not merely
their civil and political rights, but the enjoyment of economic, social, and cultural
rights, and in its far- reaching decision in the case of PUDR [People's Union for
Democratic Rights] vs. Union of India , it recognized that a third party could directly
petition, whether through a letter or other means, the Court and seek its intervention
in a matter where another party's fundamental rights were being violated. In this
case, adverting to the Constitutional prohibition on "begar", or forced labor and
traffic in human beings, PUDR submitted that workers contracted to build the large
8|Page
sports complex at the Asian Game Village in Delhi were being exploited. PUDR
asked the Court to recognize that "begar" was far more than compelling someone to
work against his or her will, and that work under exploitative and grotesquely
humiliating conditions, or work that was not even compensated by prescribed
minimum wages, was violative of fundamental rights. As the Supreme Court noted,
The rule of law does not mean that the protection of the law must be available only
to a fortunate few or that the law should be allowed to be prostituted by the vested
interests for protecting and upholding the status quo under the guise of enforcement
of their civil and political rights. The poor too have civil and political rights and rule
of law is meant for them also, though today it exists only on paper and not in reality.
If the sugar barons and the alcohol kings have the fundamental right to carry on their
business and to fatten their purses by exploiting the consuming public, have the
charmers belonging to the lowest strata of society no fundamental right to earn an
honest living through their sweat and toil? Thus the court was willing to
acknowledge that it had a mandate to advance the rights of the disadvantaged and
poor, though this might be at the behest of individuals or groups who themselves
claimed no disability. Such litigation, termed Public Interest Litigation or Social
Action Litigation by its foremost advocate, Professor Upendra Baxi, has given the
court "epistolary jurisdiction". 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 in .S. P. Gupta v. Union of India1 , 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
9|Page
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. The rule of locus standi have been relaxed and a
person acting bonafide and having sufficient interest in the proceeding of Public
Interest Litigation will alone have a locus standi and can approach the court to wipe
out violation of fundamental rights and genuine infraction of statutory provisions,
but not for personal gain or private profit or political motive or any oblique
consideration. The Supreme Court in Indian Banks Association, Bombay and ors v.
M/s Devkala Consultancy Service and Ors., held that In an appropriate case, where
the petitioner might have moved a court in her private interest and for redressal of
the personal grievance, the court in furtherance of Public Interest may treat it a
necessity to enquire into the state of affairs of the subject of litigation in the interest
of justice. Thus a private interest case can also be treated as public interest case. In
Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Commit. And Anr. v. C.K. Rajan and Ors , the
Supreme Court held, The Courts exercising their power of judicial review found to
its dismay that the poorest of the poor, depraved, the illiterate, the urban and rural
unorganized labour sector, women, children, handicapped by 'ignorance, indigence
and illiteracy' and other down trodden have either no access to justice or had been
denied justice. A new branch of proceedings known as 'Social Interest Litigation' or
'Public Interest Litigation' was evolved with a view to render complete justice to the
aforementioned classes of persona. It expanded its wings in course of time. The
Courts in pro bono public granted relief to the inmates of the prisons, provided legal
10 | P a g e
aid, directed speedy trial, maintenance of human dignity and covered several other
areas. Representative actions, pro bono publico and test litigations were entertained
in keeping with the current accent on justice to the common man and a necessary
disincentive to those who wish to bypass the, real issues on the merits by suspect
reliance on peripheral procedural shortcomings Pro bono publico constituted a
significant state in the present day judicial system. They, however, provided the
dockets with much greater responsibility for rendering the concept of justice
available to the disadvantaged sections of the society. Public interest litigation has
come to stay and its necessity cannot be overemphasized. The courts evolved a
jurisprudence of compassion. Procedural propriety was to move over giving place to
substantive concerns of the deprivation of rights. The rule of locus standi was
diluted. The Court in place of disinterested and dispassionate adjudicator became
active participant in the dispensation of justice.

2.2 Writ Jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court can be invoked under Article 32 of the
Constitution for the violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of
the Constitution. Any provision in any Constitution for Fundamental Rights is
meaningless unless there are adequate safeguards to ensure enforcement of such
provisions. Since the reality of such rights is tested only through the judiciary, the
safeguards assume even more importance. In addition, enforcement also depends
upon the degree of independence of the Judiciary and the availability of relevant
instruments with the executive authority. Indian Constitution, like most of Western
Constitutions, lays down certain provisions to ensure the enforcement of
Fundamental Rights. These are as under: (a) The Fundamental Rights provided in
the Indian Constitution are guaranteed against any executive and legislative actions.
Any executive or legislative action, which infringes upon the Fundamental Rights
11 | P a g e
of any person or any group of persons, can be declared as void by the Courts under
Article 13 of the Constitution. (b) In addition, the Judiciary has the power to issue
the prerogative writs. These are the extra-ordinary remedies provided to the citizens
to get their rights enforced against any authority in the State. These writs are -
Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari and Quo-warranto. Both, High
Courts as well as the Supreme Court may issue the writs (c) The Fundamental Rights
provided to the citizens by the Constitution cannot be suspended by the State, except
during the period of emergency, as laid down in Article 359 of the Constitution. A
Fundamental Right may also be enforced by way of normal legal procedures
including a declaratory suit or by way of defense to legal proceedings. However,
Article 32 is referred to as the "Constitutional Remedy" for enforcement of
Fundamental Rights. This provision itself has been included in the Fundamental
Rights and hence it cannot be denied to any person. Dr.B.R.Ambedkar described
Article 32 as the most important one, without which the Constitution would be
reduced to nullity. It is also referred to as the heart and soul of the Constitution. By
including Article 32 in the Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court has been made
the protector and guarantor of these Rights. An application made under Article 32
of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, cannot be refused on technical
grounds. In addition to the prescribed five types of writs, the Supreme Court may
pass any other appropriate order. Moreover, only the questions pertaining to the
Fundamental Rights can be determined in proceedings against Article 32. Under
Article 32, the Supreme Court may issue a Writ against any person or government
within the territory of India. Where the infringement of a Fundamental Right has
been established, the Supreme Court cannot refuse relief on the ground that the
aggrieved person may have remedy before some other court or under the ordinary
law. The relief can also not be denied on the ground that the disputed facts have to
be investigated or some evidence has to be collected. Even if an aggrieved person
12 | P a g e
has not asked for a particular Writ, the Supreme Court, after considering the facts
and circumstances, may grant the appropriate Writ and may even modify it to suit
the exigencies of the case. Normally, only the aggrieved person is allowed to move
the Court. But it has been held by the Supreme Court that in social or public interest
matters, any one may move the Court. A Public Interest Litigation can be filed before
the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution or before the High Court of
a State under Article 226 of the Constitution under their respective Writ
Jurisdictions. There are mainly five types of Writs (i) Writ of Habeaus Corpus, (ii)
Writ of Mandamus, (iii) Writ of Quo-Warranto, (iv) Writ of Prohibition, and (v) Writ
of Certiorari.
(I)Writ of Habeas Corpus:
It is the most valuable writ for personal liberty. Habeas Corpus means, "Let us have
the body." A person, when arrested, can move the Court for the issue of Habeas
Corpus. It is an order by a Court to the detaining authority to produce the arrested
person before it so that it may examine whether the person has been detained
lawfully or otherwise. If the Court is convinced that the person is illegally detained,
it can issue orders for his release.
(II)The Writ of Mandamus:
Mandamus is a Latin word, which means "We Command". Mandamus is an order
from a superior court to a lower court or tribunal or public authority to perform an
act, which falls within its duty. It is issued to secure the performance of public duties
and to enforce private rights withheld by the public authorities. Simply, it is a writ
issued to a public official to do a thing which is a part of his
official duty, but, which, he has failed to do, so far. This writ cannot be claimed as a
matter of right. It is the discretionary power of a court to issue such writs.

13 | P a g e
(III)The Writ of Quo-Warranto:
The word Quo-Warranto literally means "by what warrants?" It is a writ issued with
a view to restraining a person from acting in a public office to which he is not
entitled. The Writ of quo-warranto is used to prevent illegal assumption of any public
office or usurpation of any public office by anybody. For example, a person of 62
years has been appointed to fill a public office whereas the retirement age is 60 years.
Now, the appropriate High Court has a right to issue a Writ of quowarranto against
the person and declare the office vacant.

(IV)The Writ of Prohibition:

Writ of prohibition means to forbid or to stop and it is popularly known as 'Stay
Order'. This Writ is issued when a lower court or a body tries to transgress the limits
or powers vested in it. It is a Writ issued by a superior court to lower court or a
tribunal forbidding it to perform an act outside its jurisdiction. After the issue of this
Writ proceedings in the lower court etc. come to a stop. The Writ of prohibition is
issued by any High Court or the Supreme Court to any inferior court, prohibiting the
latter to continue proceedings in a particular case, where it has no legal jurisdiction
of trial. While the Writ of mandamus commands doing of particular thing, the Writ
of prohibition is essentially addressed to a subordinate court commanding inactivity.
Writ of prohibition is, thus, not available against a public officer not vested with
judicial or quasi-judicial powers. The Supreme Court can issue this Writ only where
a fundamental right is affected.

(V)The Writ of Certiorari:

Literally, Certiorari means to be certified. The Writ of Certiorari is issued by the
Supreme Court to some inferior court or tribunal to transfer the matter to it or to
some other superior authority for proper consideration. The Writ of Certiorari can
14 | P a g e
be issued by the Supreme Court or any High Court for quashing the order already
passed by an inferior court. In other words, while the prohibition is
available at the earlier stage, Certiorari is available on similar grounds at a later
stage. It can also be said that the Writ of prohibition is available during the tendency
of proceedings before a sub-ordinate court, Certiorari can be resorted to only after
the order or decision has been announced. There are several conditions necessary for
the issue of Writ of Certiorari, which are as under: (a) There should be court, tribunal
or an officer having legal authority to determine the question of deciding
fundamental rights with a duty to act judicially. (b) Such a court, tribunal or officer
must have passed order acting without jurisdiction or in excess of the judicial
authority vested by law in such court, tribunal or law. The order could also be against
the principle of natural justice or it
could contain an error of judgment in appreciating the facts of the case.

Subjects of Public Interest Litigation.

Public Interest Litigation is meant for enforcement of fundamental and other legal
rights of the people who are poor, weak, ignorant of legal redressed 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. There are three basic requirements to file the
public interest litigation. They are:-
1. Personal Injury
2. Causation
3. Redressability

15 | P a g e
1. Injury: - The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury- an
invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete and particularized. The injury
must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be
economic as well as non-economic.
2. Causation: - There must be a casual connection between the injury and the conduct
complained of, so that injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the
defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not
before the court.
3. Redressability: - It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a
favorable court decision will redress the injury. Prudential Limitations of Locus
Standi: - Additionally there are three major prudential limitations or judicially
created standing principles. Those principles were widened depending on the
circumstances:

3. CONSIDERATION OF THE COURT AND CASE LAWS

Following are the consider by the court as locus standi before the court:
Petitions received by post even though not in public interest can be treated as writ
petitions if so directed by the Honble Judge nominated for this purpose. 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 Honble Judge. If deemed expedient, a report from the concerned
authority is called before placing the matter before the Honble Judge for directions.
If so directed by the Honble Judge, the letter is registered as a writ petition and is

16 | P a g e
there after listed before the Court for hearing. But this traditional rule was
considerably relaxed by the Supreme Court in its recent rulings:4

Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. 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. Public
interest litigation is a part of the process of participate justice and standing in civil
litigation of that pattern must have liberal reception at the judicial door steps.

In the 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. It is a settled law that when a
person approaches the court of equity in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction, he
should approach the court not only with clean hands but with clean mind, heart and
with clean objectives.5
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.6

4
IBID
5
A.I.R. 1974 S.C. 209
6
AIR 1987 SC 965

17 | P a g e
 M.C Mehta V. 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.7

Parmanand Katara V. Union of India

Supreme Court held in the Public Interest Litigation filed by a human right activist
fighting for general public interest that it is a paramount obligation of every member
of medical profession to give medical aid to every injured citizen as soon as possible
without waiting for any procedural formalities.8

Environment Legal Action V. Union of India

Public Interest Litigation filed by registered voluntary organization regarding
economic degradation in coastal area. Supreme Court issued appropriate orders and
directions for enforcing the laws to protect ecology.
3) Report of research paper or newspaper
A report entitled "Treat Prisoners Equally HC" published in The Tribe, Aug 23
Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed the provisions of jail manual dividing
prisoners into A, B & C classes after holding that there cannot be any classification

7
AIR (1987) 4 SCC 463
8
AIR 1989, SC 2039

18 | P a g e
of convicts on the basis of their social status, education or habit of living .This is a
remarkable ruling given by High Court by declaring 576-A paragraph of the manual
to be " Unconstitutional". During the last few years, Judicial Activism has opened
up a new dimension for the judicial process and has given a new hope to the millions
who starve for their livelihood. There is no reason why the Court should not adopt
activist approach similar to Court in America, so as to provide remedial amplitude
to the citizens of India. Supreme Court has now realized its proper role in welfare
state and it is using its new strategy for the development of a whole new corpus of
law for effective and purposeful implementation of Public Interest Litigation. One
can simply approach to the Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights by
writing a letter or post card to any Judge. That particular letters based on true facts
and concept will be converted to writ petition. When Court welcome Public Interest
Litigation, its attempt is to endure observance of social and economic programmers
frame for the benefits of have-nots and the handicapped. Public Interest Litigation
has proved a boon for the common men. Public Interest Litigation has set right a
number of wrongs committed by an individual or by society. 9By relaxing the scope
of Public Interest Litigation, Court has brought legal aid at the doorsteps of the
teeming millions of Indians; which the executive has not been able to do despite a
lot of money is being spent on new legal aid schemes operating at the central and
state level. Supreme Court's pivotal role in expanding the scope of Public Interest
Litigation as a counter balance to the lethargy and inefficiency of the executive is
commendable

9
IBID

19 | P a g e
CONCLUSION:

Public interest litigation is social litigation that provided remedies for all, locus
standi is concept evolved from America16, locus standi means standing before the
court or file case before the court. This PIL concept is concept of locus standi that
whole society not standing before court but the some social worker or jurist file
before court behalf of public or society, so locus standi is concept evolved from
public interest litigation, which is changing their dimension and concept in broad.
Sometime latter are consider to be the PIL likewise Newspaper report in the
Hussainera Khatoon Case research material of the jurist or student other thing which
the Honble judge consider the source of the public interest. So the medium through
which the court is consider the matter are public interest litigation and stand before
the court. The liberalization of the principle of locus standi make possible for the
court to recognize a general interest in any litigant on a matter as sufficient to have
locus standi. So the concept of individual interest, changed to special interest, again
to class interest and now to sufficient interest. There is no special person require to
the file the case locus standi in thiscases are the report which the court are get matter
to consider the case as publicinterest litigation.10

10
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1934112

20 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Administrative law Book by Henry William Rawson

Wade

Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, and Human Rights: A Critical Book

by. Ian Loveland.

Understanding administrative law Book by William F.

Fox

REFERENCES

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1934112

https://definitions.uslegal.com/l/locus-standi/

http://www.lawweb.in/2015/02/basic-concept-of-locus-standi.html

21 | P a g e
22 | P a g e