SYNOPSIS/VINOD DHAKAR/ROLL NO-2017LLM33.

PROBLEMS AND PERSPECTIVES IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

INTRODUCTION:-

Public interest litigation means a “litigation conduct for the benefit of public or for removal of
some public grievance” in simple words, public interest litigation means any public spirited
person move the court for the public cause ( or public welfare) by filing the petition in the
Supreme Court under Art.32 of the Constitution or in the High Court under Art. 226 of the
constitution or before the court of magistrate under sec. 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
1973.
Public Interest Litigation is not defined in any statute or any act. It has been interpreted by judges
to consider the intent of public at large. When public interest is affecting at large then this can be
filed but affection on only one person is not a ground for filing this petition. According to the
Supreme Court’s guidelines regarding the filing of Public Interest Litigation, it complies the
following letter petition such as : 1.Bounded Labour matters, 2. Neglect children, 3. non
payment of minimum wages to workers and their exploitations, 4. petitions from jails
complaining of harassments release on personal bond, speedy trial as a fundamental right,
5.petition against police for refusing to register a case, harassment at police station, 6. petition on
harassment of women, rape, kidnapping or murder, 7. petition on harassment of scheduled cast,
schedule tribe, and other economically backward classes, 8. petition pertaining to environmental
pollution, disturbance of ecological balance, maintenance of heritage and culture, forest and wild
life etc. ,9. petitions from riot victims, 10. family pensions.

The seeds of the concept of public interest litigation were initially sown in India by Krishna Iyer
J., In 1976 in Mumbai Kamgar Sabha vs. Abdul Thai (AIR 1976 SC 1455) and was initiated in
Akhil Bharatiya Shoshit Karmachari Sangh (Railway) v. Union of India (AIR 1981 SC 298),
wherein an unregistered association of workers was permitted to institute a writ petition under
Art.32 of the Constitution for the redressal of common grievances. Krishna lyer J., enunciated
the reasons for liberalization of the rule of Locus Standi in Fertilizer Corporation Kamgar Union
v. Union of India (AIR 1981 SC 344) and the idea of 'Public Interest Litigation' blossomed in S.P.
Gupta and others vs. Union of India, (AIR 1982 SC 149).

STATEMENT OF PROBLEMS:-

Public Interest Litigation means a litigation filed for the welfare of public interest but in present
time public interest litigation is used to secure private interest so in response to this problem this
research purpose is to study the various problems related to public Interest Litigation and
reflection of judiciary on these problems.

OBJECTIVE:-
The object of this research is to understand the importance of Public Interest Litigation and find
out the problems related to P.I.L. and their solution.

1|Page
SYNOPSIS/VINOD DHAKAR/ROLL NO-2017LLM33.

SCOPE:-

This research focus entirely on problems and perspectives in Public Interest Litigation taking a
brief look at the evolution and development of P.I.L. In India and look its importance in public
with the help of judicial decisions

HYPOTHYSIS:-

Public Interest Litigation files for the welfare of public interest but now it is used for personal
interest. I assume that this kind of practice lead to the failure of due process of law.

KEY RESEARCH QUESTION:-

1. What is the criteria of filing the Public Interest litigation.

2. What are the majors available to tackle the problems related to public interest litigation.
3. Whether P.I.L. is proper works or not.

TANTATIVE CHAPTERISATION:-

1. Introduction
2. Concept of P.I.L.
3. Importance of public Interest Litigation
4. Historical development of P.I.L.
5. Problems in P.I.L.
6. Important case laws relating to P.I.L.
7. Conclusion

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:-

The paper is based on material gathered from several books, journals, articles, judicial decisions
and online research data bases. The research is purely doctrinal in nature

2|Page