Legal Petitions for Public Welfare in India
Public Interest Litigation (PIL), a legal action initiated in a court for the enforcement of public interest, has played a significant role in shaping the judicial landscape of India. Originating in the United States during the 1960s and later adopted in India, PIL has been instrumental in driving social and political change, empowering marginalized groups, and contributing to access to justice.
One of the earliest and most influential PIL cases in India was the Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union of India (1984), which led to the order for the release and rehabilitation of bonded laborers. This case marked the beginning of a new era in Indian jurisprudence, where the courts took a proactive role in addressing societal issues.
The Supreme Court also established the principle of absolute liability for environmental harm in the MC Mehta vs Union of India (1987) case. This decision has had far-reaching implications, setting a precedent for the protection of the environment and holding those responsible accountable for environmental harm.
In the Vishaka & Others v. State of Rajasthan & Others (1997) case, the court established guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at the workplace, leading to the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act (2013). This landmark decision has been instrumental in protecting the rights of women in the workplace and combating sexual harassment.
However, the use of PIL is not without its challenges. Judicial delays are a concern in PIL cases, and judicial overburdening due to increasing PIL cases is another issue. Misuse of PIL for personal or political interests instead of public causes is also a concern. Poor implementation of PIL decisions is an issue that needs attention.
Despite these challenges, PIL has strengthened the judiciary in India and expanded the scope of Article 32. Locus standi (the right to bring an action) in PIL cases is relaxed in India, making it easier for individuals and groups to seek justice for public issues. The People's Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India (1997) case addressed custodial deaths and legal aid rights, further demonstrating the potential of PIL to address pressing societal issues.
PIL procedures in India are flexible, allowing for creative and innovative approaches to address complex issues. However, the definition of PIL in India is not well defined, leading to some ambiguity in its application.
In conclusion, PIL has been a powerful tool for social and political change in India, empowering marginalized groups and contributing to access to justice. While challenges remain, the potential of PIL to address pressing societal issues and drive positive change is undeniable. The future of PIL in India promises to be an exciting and transformative one.
