CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

ENGLISH

FINAL DRAFT ON

LOCUS STANDI AND PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

SUBMITTED TO - SUBMITTED BY -

DR. PRATYUSH KAUSHIK DIKSHA SINGH

(FACULTY OF ENGLISH) B.A. LL.B (SEM.I)

ROLL NO. 1724

1
 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.A., LL.B (Hons.) Project Report
entitled “Locus Standi and Public Interest Litigation” submitted at Chanakya
National Law University is an authentic record of my work carried out under the
supervision of Dr. Pratyush Kaushik. I have not submitted this work elsewhere for
any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the contents of my Project
Report.

SIGNATURE OF CANDIDATE

NAME OF CANDIDATE: DIKSHA SINGH

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA.

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank my faculty Dr. Pratyush Kaushik whose guidance helped me
a lot with structuring my project.

I owe the present accomplishment of my project to my friends, who helped me

immensely with materials throughout the project and without whom I couldn’t
have completed it in the present way.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my parents and all those unseen hands
that helped me out at every stage of my project.

THANK YOU,

NAME: Diksha Singh

COURSE: B.A., LL.B. (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 1724

SEMESTER – First

3
CONTENT

Sr. No. Pg. No.

1. INTRODUCTION 5
2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 6
3. HYPOTHESIS 6
4. RESEARCH QUESTION 7
5. RESEARCH METHEDOLOGY 7
6. LOCUS STANDI AND PUBLIC INTEREST 8
LITIGATION- AN INTRODUCTORY
STUDY
7. DEVELOPMENTSOF PIL 12
8. LIBERISATION OF LOCUS STANDI 14
9. CASE LAWS 18
10. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 21
11. BIBLIOGRAPHY 25

4
1. INTRODUCTION

Statutes provide different ways by which real and potential litigants can vindicate
their legal rights within the parameters of the legal systems. Access to justice
involves being able to access the courts, access legal representation of one’s choice
as well as access to judicial remedies. In legal system, enhancing access to justice
is to the benefit of the general public, especially the poor and the vulnerable. The
purpose is not just to enhance access to justice, but also to prepare a level playing
ground for all as well as equal access to justice by all and sundry. Social action and
social reform is one of the most important developments that took place in the
recent years through legal action known as Public Interest Litigation, (herein after
referred as PIL).1 Until the emergence of PIL, justice was a remote reality for
illiterate, underprivileged and exploited masses. Illiterate people are generally not
aware of their legal rights, even if they are aware of their rights some time they
may not be having means to pursue their legal remedies. Justice delivery system
has acquired a big significance in modern legal jurisprudence practice. It has been
referred to as a new judicial process introduced by courts to accomplish the social
revolution contemplated by the makers of the Indian Constitution. It represents
sustained efforts on the part of judiciary to provide access to justice for the
deprived and vulnerable sections of the humanity. The person whose fundamental
right is violated can move to the Supreme Court for enforcement of their
fundamental rights. The courts exercising the power of judicial review found to its
dismay that the poorest of the poor, deprived, illiterate, urban and rural
unorganized labour sector, women, children and those handicapped by ignorance,

1
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1934112

5
indigence and illiteracy had either no access to justice or had been denied justice.
Representative action, pro bono publico and test litigation were entertained in
keeping with the accent on justice to the common man.

Locus standi means a person who approached the court should show himself that
he suffered a legal injury. The Locus standi says that a Writ can be filed by an
effected person.2 However, in case of Mandamus and Certiorari, it can be filed by
any person having a common interest with the case. Mere interest is generally not
sufficient to file the writ. The person should have more interest than that of an
ordinary member. A common citizen has the right to challenge an election if it is
held contrary to the provisions of law.

2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1. To know about what Public Interest Litigation and locus standi is

2. To study various provisions regarding the topic of Public Interest
Litigation
3. To research about how both are working together.

3. HYPOTHESIS

 Locus standi has widened the scope of Public Interest Litigation

2
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1934112

6
  Expansion of Locus standi is a path for development of Public Interest
Litigation

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. How is Public Interest Litigation and Locus standi connected?

2. What changes has Locus standi brought in Public Interest Litigation?
3. What led to the liberalization of Public Interest Litigation?

5. RESEARCH METHEDOLOGY

The researcher has relied upon Doctrinal method of research to complete the
project.

SOURCES OF DATA:

The researcher has relied on both primary and secondary sources to complete the
project.

1. Primary Sources: Judgements, Acts.

2. Secondary Sources: Books and websites.

7
6. LOCUS STANDI AND PIL- AN INTRODUCTORY STUDY

LOCUS STANDI

Access to justice has become major hurdle for under privileged people in realizing
their rights in the contemporary societies particularly in the third world countries
because of poverty, ignorance and disability which have forced the judiciary to
evolve a new statesman as it is realized that justice is a distant dream for them. In
this regard, one of the most important legal issues confronting the judicial
community world over is the rule of standing or locus standi. In the context of
growing demand to protect the weaker sections of the society, to correct the
exercise of public power, and ensure just and fair working of the executive
government, relaxation in the rule of standing proved unavoidable. Many legal
systems, particularly in common law and civil law jurisdiction, accord litigants
access to courts to the extent that such litigants have acquired special or peculiar
interest in the claim or that they have suffered or will suffer from the act to be
impugned. This is commonly referred to as locus standi or standing to sue. The
principle of locus standi is an age old one that forms the basis of any action in a
court of law. Locus Standi is a Latin phrase meaning “place to stand”. According
to Black’s law Dictionary locus standi means the right to bring an action or to be
heard in given forum. In simple words locus standi may use it as “standing” or
“legal standing.” Leslie Stein, an Australian jurist, has said that locus standi is
influenced by a number of factors for a given person or situation and legal standing

8
can vary depending on the level of the court.3 As a general rule, a person has locus
standi in a given situation if it is possible for such a person to show that the issue at
hand causes harm and that an action undertaken by the court could redress that
harm.

Lord Denning in R v. Paddington as observed that the court would not listen, of
course, to a mere busybody who was interfering in things which did not concern
him. But it will listen to anyone whose interests are affected by what has been
done. For instance, if a citizen wants to challenge a law, the citizen must first show
that he or she is experiencing harm as a result of that law. This means that people
cannot challenge laws just on the principle of the matter or because they think that
those laws might harm other people. These individuals must also be able to show
that when the case is filed, their interest is also affected by the law which is
commonly known as locus standi.4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

Public Interest Litigation can be broadly defined as 'litigation for the protection of
public interest' .Its unequivocal purpose is to estrange the suffering of all those
who have borne the burnt of insensible treatment at the hands of fellow human
being. Perspicuity in public life & fair judicial action are the right answer to check
increasing peril of infringement of legal rights. It develops a new jurisprudence of

3
https://www.lawnotes.in/Locus_standi
4
http://lex-warrier.in/2015/04/locus-standi/

9
the accountability of the state for constitutional and legal violations adversely
affecting the interest of the weaker elements in the community.

Till 1960s and seventies, the concept of litigation in India was still in its
elementary form and was seen as a private pursuit for the vindication of private
vested interests. Litigation was consisted mainly of some action initiated and
continued by certain individuals, usually, addressing their own grievances or
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. As a result, there was hardly any link between the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution of India and citizen of the country i.e. the laws
made by the legislature on the one hand for the welfare of citizens but on the other
hand the vast majority of illiterate citizens are deprived of the same.

However, the entire scenario changed during Eighties with the Supreme Court of
India led the concept of public interest litigation (PIL). The courts in India, in a
series of creative steps, responded to the clarion call for justice to be done, by first
recognizing that the traditional system of litigation, highly individualistic and
adversarial, was ill-suited to meet the collective claims of the underprivileged in
the society. They relied on the wide power in the Constitution and other sources
such as the Directive principles, in India to develop an appropriate method to
advance and protect fundamental rights and used this power to foster a public
interest litigation system to fulfill the constitutional promise of social and

10
economic order based on equality. Proactive and enlightened members of the
judiciary exercised their insight to rebalance the distribution of legal resources,
increase access to justice for the disadvantaged, and imbue formal legal guarantees
with substantive and positive content. This trend shows stark difference between
the traditional justice delivery system and the modern informal justice system
where the judiciary is performing administrative judicial role. PIL is necessary
rejection of "laissez faire" of traditional jurisprudence.

The splendid efforts of Justice P. N. Bhagwati and Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer5 were
instrumental of this juristic revolution of eighties as a result any citizen of India or
any consumer groups or social action groups can 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. Further, public interest cases could be filed without
investment of heavy court fees as required in private civil litigation.

5
https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=locus%20standi

11
7. DEVELOPMENTS IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

1. Unlike Britain, India has a written constitution which through Part III
(Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy)
provides a framework for regulating relations between the state and its
citizens and between citizens inter-se.

2. India has some of the most progressive social legislation relating to bonded
labor, minimum wages, land ceiling, environmental protection, etc which are
rarely found anywhere in the world.. This has made it easier for the courts to
drag up the executive when it is not performing its duties in ensuring the
rights of the poor as per the law of the land.

3. Remedial nature of PIL departs from traditional locus standi rules. Thus a
person acting bonafide and having sufficient interest in the proceeding of
PIL will alone have a locus standi and can approach the court and genuine
infraction of statutory provisions. The judges themselves have in some cases
initiated suo moto action based on newspaper articles or letters received.

4. It is indirectly incorporated the principles enshrined in the Part IV into Part

III of Indian Constitution thereby making them judicially enforceable. For
instance the "right to life" in Article 21 has been expanded to include right to

12
 free legal aid, right to live with dignity, right to education, right to work,
freedom from torture, bar fetters and hand cuffing in prisons, etc.

5. Perceptive judges have persistently innovated on the side of the poor. Like,
in the Bandhua Mukti Morcha case,6 the apex court put the burden of proof
on the respondent stating it would treat every case of forced labor as a case
of bonded labor unless proven otherwise by the employer. Similarly in the
Asiad Workers judgment case, Justice Bhagwati held that anyone getting
less than the minimum wage can approach the Supreme Court directly
without going through the labor commissioner and lower courts.

6. In PIL cases where the petitioner is not in a position to provide all the
necessary evidence, either because it is capacious or because the parties are
weak socially or economically, courts have appointed commissions to
collect information on facts and present it before the bench.

6
https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=locus%20standi

13
8. LIBERISATION OF LOCUS STANDI

The problem of strict interpretation of the term locus standi came to light in the
wake of the States taking over an increasing role in socio-economic fields with its
affiliated duties and obligations of public nature. This narrow view of the law of
standing leads to several consequences. One, in some cases there may not be
anyone having standing to challenge an action of the authority and thus the
concerned authority may merrily continue its wrongful action without fear of
anyone challenging its action in court. Thus, public injuries resulting in mass
suffering may remain unaddressed because none has standing to seek judicial
remedy. Two, in a country like India, because of poverty, ignorance, illiteracy and
fear, the poor are unable to seek redress of their grievances. They are unable to
seek access to the courts not because the doors of the courts are technically closed
to them, but because they themselves are not financially able to do so, and
therefore they continue to suffer the wrong. The need for liberalization of locus
standi was being felt even before the first public interest litigation was filed. A
high-powered committee was constituted by the Government of India in 1997; it
had emphasized the need for making the rules of locus standi broad based. The
committee observed that one being driven out of court on his separate cause of
action was itself public wrong, the rule of locus standi requires to be broad based
and any organization or individual must be able to start such legal action. Steps
have been taken in the past and many more continue to be implemented for the
benefits of the underprivileged and oppressed classes, whereby PIL acts as an
instrument of social change and propels the representation of disadvantaged in the
court of justice.

14
Public interest litigation has resulted out of the liberalization of the complex rules,
of formal legal system. It accelerates the zest of law to impart justice.

PIL, which is a, comparatively modern development constitutes a significant

segment of the expanding horizon of judicial power and has acquired legitimacy.
The court described PIL as a strategic arm of the legal aid movement. Through the
new jurisdiction, the Indian Judges have undertaken expanding responsibilities as
critics and monitors of government and its agencies. The scope and nature of PIL
has been decisively laid down by the Supreme Court in the Asian Workers when
Bhagwati, J., described PIL as a challenge and an opportunity to the government
and its officers to make basic human rights meaningful to the deprived and
vulnerable sections of the community.7

The Supreme Court has thus taken the task of implementing the constitutional
mandate for lega1 aid introduced by Forty Second Amendment of the Constitution.
It is an attempt to protect and promote social justice through the instrumentality of
law. PIL is a correct reaction from the court itself in the shape of judicial effort to
solve the much agitated problem of access to justice in the legal conscience of the
country. It can be said to be a right step taken in line with the international effort to
attain sustainable development. It is a most reliable way of imparting justice to the
otherwise ill-fated poor and weaker sections of the society. Courts entertain PIL
not in a cavalier fashion. Nor do they adopt confrontation with the Executive and
jump into the latter’s shoes in ensuring social and economic rescue programmes.
They merely assist in the realization of the Constitutional objectives. But at the
same time one can notice that the Supreme Court preferred to bind itself in self-
discipline and expressed resentment at the liberalizing policy from inside towards
PIL.

7
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l273-Public-Interest-Litigation.html

15
Side by side with the liberalization of locus standi and the acceptance of PIL, the
court has also laid down a few constraints in the judicial handling of PIL cases.
The courts had to make use of different strategies for achieving the task.8

Liberalization of standing is the first criteria adopted for providing access to

justice. The rules of locus standi have been relaxed and a person acting bonafide
and having sufficient interest in the proceeding of PIL will 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. PIL has come to stay and its
necessity cannot be overemphasized. The courts evolved a jurisprudence of
compassion. Procedural propriety is to move over giving place to substantive
concerns of the deprivation of rights. Therefore the rule of locus standi is diluted.
The Court instead of being disinterested and dispassionate adjudicator became
active participant in the dispensation of justice”. Widespread access to justice is
more likely to result in equal justice. Of course, inequalities always exist. Those,
with power and resources always have a bigger effect on governmental and private
decisions than those lacking power and resources. But this inequality is magnified
where access to courts is restricted, because restrictions are less likely to affect
powerful economic interests. They easily have access to the courts. As a result,
they are treated with respect by government officials. Citizens and their
organizations often do not have such equal access to justice and the effect is felt
not only in the courts but in other governmental bodies as well. The battle over
expanded standing to sue is not, in short, about whether everyone should have
access to justice. Those with money and power already have access. The battle
over standing to sue is about whether other citizens will have access as well. If

8
http://www.manupatra.com/roundup/379/Articles/Public%20Interest%20Litigation.pdf

16
democracy is for all, if the rule of law is for all, and if justice is for all, then
standing should be for all. To put it in the proper order, where standing is available
to all, democracy, the rule of law, and justice are more likely to be for all. The
recent trends of judicial pronouncements suggest that PIL has traversed beyond the
original objective of providing access to judicial process to the poor and the
disadvantaged. Under various public interest actions, the courts have granted relief
to the inmates of the prisons, provided legal aid, directed speedy trial and
maintenance of human dignity and covered several other similar areas. All
developed legal systems have to face the problem of adjusting conflicts between
two aspects of public interest, that is, the desirability of encouraging individual
citizens to participate actively in the enforcement of the law and the undesirability
of encouraging the professional litigants and meddlesome interlopers to invoke the
jurisdiction of the courts in matters that do not concern them.

In India, inspired by the injustices perpetrated by the successive governments,

lawyers pursued ‘public interest’ cases at the instigation of activists, in an attempt
to remedy the failure of government institutions and administrative bodies to
adequately represent and address marginalized interests. PIL claims have been
used to defend the rights of the poor, illiterate and impoverished people of India.
The legal basis for the development of PIL actions is derived from Article 32 of the
Constitution. Under Article 32, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over all
cases concerning fundamental freedoms enumerated in Articles 14 to 32.9

9
http://www.manupatra.com/roundup/379/Articles/Public%20Interest%20Litigation.pdf

17
9. CASE LAWS

 One of the earliest cases of public interest litigation was that reported as
Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. State of Bihar. This case was concerned with a
series of articles published in a prominent newspaper - the Indian Express
which exposed the plight of under-trial prisoners in the state of Bihar. A writ
petition was filed by an advocate drawing the Court's attention to the
deplorable plight of these prisoners. Many of them had been in jail for
longer periods than the maximum permissible sentences for the offences
they had been charged with. The Supreme Court accepted the locus standi of
the advocate to maintain the writ petition. Thereafter, a series of cases
followed in which the Court gave directions through which the 'right to
speedy trial' was deemed to be an integral and an essential part of the
protection of life and personal liberty. Soon thereafter, two noted professors
of law filed writ petitions in the Supreme Court highlighting various abuses
of the law, which, they asserted, were a violation of Article 21 of the
Constitution. These included inhuman conditions prevailing in protective
homes, long pendency of trials in court, trafficking of women, importation
of children for homosexual purposes, and the non-payment of wages to
bonded labourers among others. The Supreme Court accepted their locus
standi to represent the suffering masses and passed guidelines and orders
that greatly ameliorated the conditions of these people. 10
 Public interest litigation acquired a new dimension - namely that of
'epistolary jurisdiction' with the decision in the case of Sunil Batra v. Delhi
Administration. It was initiated by a letter that was written by a prisoner
10
https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=locus%20standi

18
 lodged in jail to a Judge of the Supreme Court. The prisoner complained of a
brutal assault committed by a Head Warder on another prisoner. The Court
treated that letter as a writ petition, and, while issuing various directions,
opined that: "...technicalities and legal niceties are no impediment to the
court entertaining even an informal communication as a proceeding for
habeas corpus if the basic facts are found".11
 In Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardichand the Court recognized the locus
standi of a group of citizens who sought directions against the local
Municipal Council for removal of open drains that caused stench as well as
diseases. The Court, recognizing the right of the group of citizens, asserted
that if the: "...centre of gravity of justice is to shift as indeed the Preamble to
the Constitution mandates, from the traditional individualism of locus standi
to the community orientation of public interest litigation, the court must
consider the issues as there is need to focus on the ordinary men."12
 In Parmanand Katara v. Union of India the Supreme Court accepted an
application by an advocate that highlighted a news item titled "Law Helps
the Injured to Die" published in a national daily, The Hindustan Times. The
petitioner brought to light the difficulties faced by persons injured in road
and other accidents in availing urgent and life-saving medical treatment,
since many hospitals and doctors refused to treat them unless certain
procedural formalities were completed in these medico-legal cases. The
Supreme Court directed medical establishments to provide instant medical
aid to such injured people, notwithstanding the formalities to be followed
under the procedural criminal law.

11
http://www.manupatra.com/roundup/379/Articles/Public%20Interest%20Litigation.pdf
12
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/mobile/articles/details.asp?mod_id=4094

19
 In many other instances, the Supreme Court has risen to the changing needs
of society and taken proactive steps to address these needs. It was therefore
the extensive liberalization of the rule of locus standi which gave birth to a
flexible public interest litigation system.
 In a landmark judgment in of Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum v.
Union of India in year 1995 Supreme Court issued guidelines for
rehabilitation and compensation for the rape on working women. Another
crucial intervention was made in Council for Environment Legal Action v.
Union of India wherein a registered NGO had sought directions from the
Supreme Court in order to tackle ecological degradation in coastal areas.
 An important step in the area of gender justice was the decision in Vishaka
v. State of Rajasthan.The petition in that case originated from the gang-rape
of a grassroots social worker. In that opinion, the Court invoked the text of
the Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against
Women (CEDAW) and framed guidelines for establishing redressed
mechanisms to tackle sexual harassment of women at workplaces. Though
the decision has come under considerable criticism for encroaching into the
domain of the legislature, the fact remains that till date the legislature has
not enacted any law on the point. It must be remembered that meaningful
social change, like any sustained transformation, demands a long-term
engagement. Even though a particular petition may fail to secure relief in a
wholesome manner or be slow in its implementation, litigation is
nevertheless an important step towards systemic reforms.

20
10. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Justice – social, economic and political is laid down in the Preamble as guiding
principle of the Constitution. Social justice is the main plank on which
constitutional edifice is built. In fact, justice is the most positive aspect of social
and political philosophy. The country’s primary concern was the secularization and
democratization of Indian society and polity as a prerequisite for dispensing justice
to one and all. In D.S. Nakara v. Union of India. As a natural consequence of the
liberalization of ‘locus standi’ rule and the increasing willingness of the judiciary
to render remedial justice to the weaker sections, there was a flood of PIL cases in
the Supreme Court and High Courts. These cases provided rare insights into the
working and the thinking of the court and the judges who preside over it. An
analytical perusal of public interest litigation cases before the Supreme Court and
High Courts shows that the courts have been really very liberal in granting
‘standing’ to persons coming from different fields. It is apparent that the courts are
more concerned with the ‘kinds of issues’ raised than with the persons bringing
those cases to the courts. This liberal trend is all the more apparent form the fact
that courts, especially the Supreme Court, have admitted the letters, postcards,
telegrams, and even newspaper items as writ petitions under Article 32 of Indian
Constitution. PIL has an important role to play in the justice system; it affords a
ladder to justice to the disadvantaged sections of society, some of which might not
even be well-informed about their rights. Furthermore, it provides an avenue to
enforce diffused rights for which either it is difficult to identify an aggrieved
person or where aggrieved persons have no incentives to knock at the doors of the
courts.

21
PIL in India has produced astounding results which were unthinkable three decades
ago. The greatest contribution of it has been enhancing the accountability of
governments towards human rights of underprivileged. Judges alone cannot
provide effective responses to governmental lawlessness but they can surely a
culture formation where political power becomes increasingly sensitive to human
rights.

But, public interest litigants, all over the country, have not taken very humanely to
such court decisions. They do fear that this will sound the death-knell of the
people-friendly concept of PIL. However, bona fide litigants of India have nothing
to fear.

Only those activists who prefer to file frivolous complaints will have to pay
compensation to the opposite parties. It is actually a welcome move because no
one in the country can deny that even PIL activists should be responsible and
accountable. It is also notable here that even the Consumers Protection Act, 1986
has been amended to provide compensation to opposite parties in cases of frivolous
complaints made by consumers. In any way, it now does require a complete rethink
and restructuring. It is however, obvious that overuse and abuse of PIL can only
make it stale and ineffective. Since it is an extraordinary remedy available at a
cheaper cost to all citizens of the country, it ought not to be used by all litigants as
a substitute for ordinary ones or as a means to file frivolous complaints.

The power of the Court to entertain any circumstance that may hinder societal
growth, or may cause hardship to a class of individuals is not unconstrained. It is

carefully regulated with tight reins, and cases of public interest are taken up only
after scrupulous scrutiny. Similarly there may be cases where the PIL may affect
22
the right of persons not before the court, and therefore in shaping the relief the
court must invariably take into account its impact on those interests and the court
must exercise greatest caution and adopt procedure ensuring sufficient notice to all
interests likely to be affected.

At present, the court can treat a letter as a writ petition and take action upon it. But,
it is not every letter, which may be treated as a writ petition by the court. The court
would be justified in treating the letter as a writ petition only in the following
cases:

(i) It is only where the letter is addressed by an aggrieved person or

(ii) A public spirited individual or

(iii) A social action group for the enforcement of the constitutional or the legal
rights of a person in custody or of a class or group of persons who by reason of
poverty, disability or socially or economically disadvantaged position find it
difficult to approach the court for redress.

Even though it is very much essential to curb the misuse and abuse of PIL, any
move by the government to regulate the PIL results in widespread protests from
those who are not aware of its abuse and equate any form of regulation with
erosion of their fundamental rights. Under these circumstances the Supreme Court
of India is required to step in by incorporating safe guards provided by the civil
procedure code in matters of stay orders /injunctions in the arena of PIL.

23
However shedding all the doubts and abuses against misuse of PIL, it must be
accepted that is working as an important instrument of social change. It is working
for the welfare of every section of society. It is the sword of every one used only
for taking the justice. The innovation of this legitimate instrument proved
beneficial for the developing country like India. PIL has been used as a strategy to
combat the atrocities prevailing in society. It is an institutional initiative towards
the welfare of the needy class of the society.

24
11. BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

1. Jagga Kapur (ed.), Supreme Court on Public Interest Litigation: Cases and
materials - The debate over original intent, in 4 volumes (New Delhi, LIPS
Publications Pvt. Ltd., 1998)
2. Mamta Rao, Public Interest Litigation in India - a Renaissance in Social
Justice, 2nd edn. (Lucknow: Eastern Book Company, 2004)

WEBSITES

1. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1934112
2. https://www.lawnotes.in/Locus_standi
3. http://lex-warrier.in/2015/04/locus-standi/
4. https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=locus%20standi
5. http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/mobile/articles/details.asp?mod_id=4094
6. http://www.lawweb.in/2015/02/basic-concept-of-locus-standi.html
7. http://www.manupatra.com/roundup/379/Articles/Public%20Interest%20Liti
gation.pdf
8. http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l273-Public-Interest-
Litigation.html

25