Published By: Shrinkhla Singh, B.BA, LL. B (Hons.) Student, VIT School of Law, Chennai

Abstract

Public Interest Litigation is a potent instrument to facilitate access to justice for social justice by involving the judiciary in public issues. Originally developed in the US to provide legal representation to sections of society that did not have a proper legal framework to derive it, PIL brought about a revolution in India in the latter part of the 1970s. It widened the concept of locus standi into opening the avenues for third-party petitions for redressal of systemic injustices, especially on issues concerning human rights, environmental protection, and governance accountability. This paper traces the evolution of PIL and delves into the objectives behind it, which has made a far-reaching impact on Indian society.

The emergence of PIL has promoted sustainable legal and policy changes against environmental degradation, custodial violence, bonded labour, and public health crises. This has been facilitated by landmark cases portraying PIL such as Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (right to a speedy trial), Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (abolition of bonded labour), and M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (environmental protection). However, the mass use of PIL also opened the gates to frivolous litigation, judicial overreach, and meagre enforcement mechanisms. To ensure that PIL remains a strong instrument through which the public can seek redress and to prevent misuse, the judiciary has taken steps to impose stricter guidelines.

Promotion of judicial capacity enhancement, independent monitoring of court decrees, and more public knowledge will correlate to progressive reforms for increasing PIL’s role in social justice. By responsible PIL activism and proper enforcement of judicial decisions, the legal set-up can strengthen constitutional values and safeguard the rights of marginalized communities. However, PIL must be strategically used to balance the activism of the judiciary and the efficiency of governance, otherwise, it will end as an instrument of justice, transparency, and accountability in the democratic fabric of India.

Introduction

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) functions as a crucial legal instrument[1] that operates within the judicial system to promote social causes and protect public interests collectively instead of focusing on individual complaints. The fundamental nature of this mechanism lies in its ability to make justice accessible to all by providing citizens with the power to contest governmental or corporate behaviours that threaten public interests and societal well-being. Public Interest Litigation emerges as a formidable tool to tackle systemic problems while defending basic rights and demanding state actor accountability because it draws its foundational principles from social justice themes present in numerous constitutional documents. This article embarks on an exploration of the intricate and multifarious functions of Public Interest Litigation as a tool for social justice advancement by scrutinizing its historical development, breadth of application, tangible effects, encountered obstacles, and future potential.

Historical Context and Evolution of PILs

The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was first developed in the United States during the 1960s as a legal tool designed to offer representation to marginalized groups and public causes. The conventional principles of legal standing (Locus Standi) historically limited judicial access to individuals who experienced direct effects from the issues at hand. PIL transformed legal procedures by allowing people and groups to request court action for the underprivileged which made justice more accessible to all. The transformation enabled judicial bodies to tackle extensive societal issues which rendered Public Interest Litigation an essential mechanism for social justice and legal activism. The concept emerged as a significant legal principle across multiple jurisdictions because it provided a mechanism to uphold fundamental rights and address systemic injustices for individuals who lacked the financial resources or awareness necessary to access judicial systems independently. The realm of legal jurisprudence experienced a fundamental transformation as courts evolved into active social change agents instead of simple dispute resolvers, which strengthened the judiciary’s duty to uphold public rights.

The landscape of constitutional law in India[2] underwent significant changes in the late 1970s and early 1980s due to the growing significance of PIL. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer and P.N. Bhagwati were two of the most important judges who expanded the meaning of Article 32 of the Indian Constitution which provides for constitutional remedies. It was they who opened the doors of the courts to more cases of violation of human rights, environmental issues, and social injustice for third parties to be consulted. The Emergency of 1975-77 revealed the extent of state repression and, therefore, the judiciary had to seize more powers to protect fundamental rights. Thus, PIL emerged[3] as a strong tool to address issues that could not be addressed because of procedural barriers. It has since become an important part of the Indian legal system which enables the judiciary to seek and deliver justice on issues of public concern and make the government accountable to the people while also eliminating the gap between law and justice.

Numerous significant cases have influenced the development of PIL in India. The case Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979)[4] established a benchmark by emphasizing the suffering of undertrial prisoners and upholding the right to a prompt trial. Likewise, Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984) highlighted the government’s responsibility to eliminate bonded labour, leading to substantial legal reforms. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987), the Supreme Court adopted an assertive approach toward environmental conservation, mandating the shutdown of factories contaminating the Ganga River and establishing the groundwork for dedicated environmental tribunals. These instances illustrate the transformative capacity of PIL in tackling systemic challenges and guaranteeing justice for at-risk communities. Through the expansion of judicial scrutiny in public interest issues, PIL has transformed the function of the Indian judiciary, positioning it as an engaged guardian of constitutional rights and an essential tool for legal and social change.

Core Objectives and Features

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) acts as a vital tool to guarantee justice, uphold constitutional principles, and make authorities answerable. A key goal is to ensure that marginalized and disadvantaged communities can access justice, which they might otherwise find difficult to achieve within the legal system. By permitting third-party petitions, PIL guarantees that concerns impacting vulnerable groups—like violations of labour rights, environmental damage, and abuses of human rights—are dealt with efficiently. It also seeks to address systemic problems that affect a significant part of society, such as socio-economic inequalities, governance shortcomings, and public health emergencies. Via PIL, courts reinforce constitutional principles, especially basic rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy, making sure that laws conform to the wider goals of justice and equality. Another important role of PIL is to uphold accountability, requiring government bodies, public officials, and private organizations to comply with legal and ethical norms. It serves as protection against administrative inefficiencies, corruption, and policy shortcomings, promoting transparency and effective governance. This legal instrument connects the judicial system with social justice, allowing courts to engage in issues that greatly impact public well-being and strengthening the judiciary’s function as a guardian of essential rights and democratic values.

What sets PIL apart from conventional litigation is its adaptable and comprehensive method of seeking legal remedies. The easing of locus standi is one of its most characteristic aspects, permitting any interested person or group to submit a petition for those unable to do it themselves. This guarantees that public complaints, even those brought up by outside parties, receive judicial consideration. Moreover, the procedure for submitting a PIL is much less formal compared to conventional lawsuits—frequently, just a basic letter directed to the court is enough to start the process. This accessibility promotes increased public involvement and enables citizens to interact with legal institutions to seek justice. PIL also reflects judicial activism, where courts assume an investigative and instructive role, frequently appointing commissions, seeking expert advice, and overseeing the execution of their decisions. In contrast to traditional litigation, which mainly aims at settling conflicts between parties, PIL takes a remedial stance, emphasizing corrective measures and sustainable solutions. This capability has enabled PIL to act as a catalyst for legal and policy reforms, fostering progressive advancements in sectors like environmental conservation, social welfare, and governance. Ultimately, PIL enables citizens to demand accountability from authorities and enhances democratic principles by making the legal system more attentive to public issues.

Scope and Impact of PILs on the Society[5]

Indian PIL has effectively tackled a multitude of issues related to social concerns, environmental ones, and issues relating to governance. Environment, to touch upon the most significant aspects, involved the courts in industrial pollution control and conservation of forests and wildlife through sustainable development measures. Landmark cases like M.C. Mehta v. Union of India have ushered in stricter environmental regulations and pollution control measures. As such, PIL has also been instrumental in safeguarding human rights through the eradication of custodial torture and caste-based discrimination besides the rights of marginalized communities, and has made certain that fundamental freedom is not compromised. The courts have dealt with public health and sanitation-related issues famously, clean water some cases pertained to food security and disease prevention, which culminated in developed policy and better government accountability through PIL.

Beyond achieving social justice, Public Interest Litigation has seriously hit governance and transparency domains by exposing corruption as well as getting welfare schemes implemented properly and holding authorities accountable for administrative inefficiencies. Recommendations or commands from the courts induced by PIL have so far made major opening strides toward transparency in the functioning of the government, protection of whistleblowers, and restricting the misappropriation of public funds. The proactive stance of the judiciary has spurred citizens to participate in legal processes and, more importantly, it has empowered individuals and organizations to challenge inefficiencies in governance. PIL interventions have also worked for improvement in the education sector. Cases were filed to ensure free and compulsory education, create better government school infrastructure, and promote vocational training programs. This increase in access to education leads to greater opportunities for social equity and empowerment. PIL has not only acted as a bridge between people and their grievances but also fortified democratic values and encouraged grassroots participation in legal and policy issues.

The effects of PIL are not confined to such immediate judicial relief as above; it propagates long-term changes in the legal and institutional reform spectrum. Most of the landmark PILs have either brought into force drastic new legislations or fortified existing policies. Such PIL movements have changed India’s legal landscape. The areas most affected by such judicial activism through PIL include labour laws, environmental laws, and human rights protection, which have guaranteed benefits in social progress for all. The judiciary’s intervention in cases like bonded labour, child labour, and women’s rights has called for reinforcement of legal frameworks and better enforcement. Added to this, PIL has become a major player in good governance because of its rigorous application of certain principles, such as efficiency, accountability, and appropriate public administration. PIL makes action-orientation toward public interest for state institutions, which indeed transforms the judicial system of India into a very strong weapon for socio-legal reform ensuring that justice does not only merely remain theoretical but is applied for the betterment of society.

Limitations

In recent years, it has become the most powerful tool to take justice to the common man but misused most of the time by a single person for selfish ends, political motives.[6], or for self-publicizing purposes. Frivolous PIL is more damaging than wasteful of judicial resources and pours into unnecessary litigation before courts, obstructing genuinely pending cases in a queue. Some people impose such harassment through PIL or even settle personal scores by pretending to do so, and this undermines the real purpose of PIL. This in turn caused judicial scrutiny where superior courts have imposed burdens on petitioners for filing PILs for no cause or reason to put the brakes on abuse of the process. Stricter guidelines and judicial discretion on the institution of deposit petitions will ensure that the PIL remains a tool for public welfare and not the welfare of self.

Another issue would be Judicial Overreach, where courts, through public interest litigation, tend to encroach on the functions of the executive and legislature. However, judicial activism is necessary for safeguarding rights; too much interference in policymaking can jeopardize the governance processes and violate the principle of separation of powers. Furthermore, the effectiveness of PILs is impaired due to weak implementation mechanisms, bureaucratic delays, and opposition from authorities. In fact, many landmark judgments are not enforced because of a lack of resources and political willingness. Subsequently, the threshold impact of judicial intervention is thus restricted.

However, public awareness and participation in PIL continue to be inadequate, reducing its potential to bring about systemic change-the most important factor. There are very few citizens within those poor and marginalized groups who are even aware of their rights to seek a judicial remedy through PIL. Civil societies, media, and adding disillusion further weaken the same. Improving legal literacy, streamlining the process of filing, and encouraging greater involvement of people would go a long way in making PILs more effective. Proper utilization of PIL must also be guaranteed so that the PIL does not lose its integrity and become misused by personal or political agendas in favour of pure public interest.

A way forward: Strengthening PIL for Social Justice

To ensure that Public Interest Litigation (PIL) serves as a genuine tool for social justice[7], it is necessary to promote the responsibility of PIL activism. People and institutions could be motivated to file good faith PILs after thorough research and due diligence to avoid misuse of PIL. Training and providing legal assistance can be beneficial to enhance PIL activism’s capacity to address core issues. Last but not least, best practices in the implementation of a proper screening mechanism for identifying frivolous or mala fide PILs will set the judicial delay and leave matters of a serious nature in the hands of courts alone. In this direction, strengthening judicial capacity is imperative; this could be done by simply increasing the number of judges or by adopting software to ensure faster case management, besides training courts on specific PIL-related issues. These initiatives will not only reduce the number of days in litigation but will also create faith among people that the judiciary handles PILs.

PILs will require stronger enforcement mechanisms and public support during this period beyond the judiciary, so they can last. Independent monitoring institutions can be instituted to ensure the enforcement of court orders to curb delays in compliance by government authorities. Local communities and civil society organizations should participate in monitoring implementation, thereby creating grassroots accountability. Sufficient resource allocation should also be made to government agencies with implementation responsibilities for the directives of the court. Joining these efforts, and raising public awareness through education campaigns and involvement of the media will generate active participation of citizens in PILs.

Conclusion

Public interest litigation (PIL) has proved to be the most important tool of social justice; it connects the law to governance through the accountability of authorities thus safeguarding human rights. It has transformed systemic injustices while empowering communities and encouraging people to become involved with legal activism on environmental and governance burdens. Using this, however, has added some difficulties for example misuse and overreach from the judiciary and weak enforceability. Moreover, without these failings, the strength of judicial capacity ensures responsible public interest litigation activism and stronger public participation.

Thus, in the PIL, it is again possible with the right balance of judicial intervention and collaboration with governance for powerful social transformation and democratic accountability within India.

---

[1] Public Interest Litigation in India, https://sleepyclasses.com/public-interest-litigation-india/

[2] Siddiqua Abdullah, Origin and Development of PIL in India, iPleaders, https://blog.ipleaders.in/origin-and-development-of-pil-in-india/

[3] Drishti Judiciary, Public Interest Litigation (PIL), DRISHTI JUDICIARY https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/editorial/public-interest-litigation-pil.

[4] Drishti IAS, Public Interest Litigation, https://www.drishtiias.com/printpdf/public-interest-litigation

[5] Mayashree Acharya, What is Public Interest Litigation and What is Its Importance?, CLEARTAX (July 11, 2024), https://cleartax.in/s/public-interest-litigation.

[6] Sreeraj K.V., Advantages and Disadvantages of Public Interest Litigation in India, IPL LEADERS (May 18, 2016), https://blog.ipleaders.in/advantages-disadvantages-public-interest-litigation-india/.

[7] Dr. (Mrs.) Saroj Bohra, Public Interest Litigation: Access to Justice, available at https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-docs/16860502