Q. Consider the following statements regarding Public interest litigation (PIL)
1. Unlike Judicial activism, Public interest litigation (PIL) is mentioned in constitution.
2. Public Interest Litigation cannot be filed before the High Courts.
3. A Public Interest Litigation cannot be filed against the Central government.
How many statements given above are correct?
Exp) Option d is the correct answer.
Statement 1 is incorrect: Both Public interest litigation (PIL) and judicial activism are not mentioned in constitution. The first signs of judicial activism appeared in the realm of constitutional law when the Supreme Court ruled that the parliament could amend any part of the constitution save what they considered the ‘basic structure of the constitution’. PIL originated and developed in USA in 1960s. In India, it is a product of judicial activism of Supreme court. It was introduced in early 1980s by Justice PN Bhagwati and V. Krishna Iyer.
Statement 2 is incorrect: A Petitioner can file the Public Interest Litigation before the Supreme Court or the High Court of that State.
Statement 3 is incorrect: A Public Interest Litigation can be filed against a State/ Central Govt., Municipal Authorities, and not any private party. However, Private party can be included in the PIL as Respondent, after making concerned state authority, a party. For example- if there is a Private factory in Delhi, which is causing pollution, then people living nearly, or any other person can file a PIL against the Government of Delhi, Pollution Control Board, and against the private factory.
| Important Tips Public interest litigation is not defined in any statute or in any act. It has been interpreted by judges to consider the intent of public at large. Judicial activism is the interpretation of the constitution to advocate contemporary values and conditions. On the other hand, judicial restraint is limiting the powers of the judges to strike down a law. |
