Public Interest Lawyering Hub

This Public Interest Lawyering Hub aims to radically redefine and reshape the discourse of public interest lawyering in India. At CLPR, one of our core areas of work is how the law and legal process can be used effectively in the public interest for the enforcement of social rights.

In India, any mention of public interest lawyering is assumed to be about “Public Interest Litigation” or “PIL”. PIL was an innovation initiated in India by the activist lawyers, academics and judges of the Supreme Court in the late seventies and early eighties to enable the most marginalized communities to gain access to the High Courts and the Supreme Court by expanding the traditional rules of public law standing. While PILs have been successful in drawing public and judicial attention to serious issues, today more than 30 years later, it faces formidable challenges.

As Galanter and Krishnan point out, the PIL is limited by an inability to resolve disputed questions of fact; weakness in delivering concrete remedies and monitoring performance; reliance on generalist volunteers with no organizational staying power; and dissociation from the organization and the priorities of the disadvantaged. Recent empirical research shows that PILs make up only 1% of the case docket in the Supreme Court of India.

Public interest lawyering must transcend the current model – along with strengthening PILs, other innovative methods of lawyering in the public interest need to be explored and must embrace a wide array of techniques and approaches of using the law for transformative social change.

Public interest lawyering strategies around the world have advanced from the PIL or class action litigation to the selection and use of test cases, the role of amicus briefs, intervener applications, suits for damages and injunctive relief; pre-legislative drafting; constitutional litigation, the use of the ordinary civil courts to secure effective relief; civil liberties litigation, litigation and representation before special tribunals and authorities such as the consumer courts and the Commissioner for Disabilities, coalition litigation; the use of public advocacy and media and the provision of pro bono legal services which need to be redeveloped in our present context.

This PIL Hub will aim to contain an archive of academic writing on rights based lawyering, judgments, case studies and materials, petition formats and resource materials that will be of relevance to public interest lawyers, activists, students and academics. We also aim to develop an online virtual course on public interest lawyering for law students, social activists and lawyers to consolidate and enrich the knowledge and practice of public interest lawyering.

Journal Articles

Bhagwati, P. N., and C. J. Dias. “The Judiciary in India: A Hunger and Thirst for Justice.” NUJS L. Rev. 5 (2012): 171.

Galanter, Marc, and Jayanth K. Krishnan. “Bread for the Poor: Access to Justice and the Rights of the Needy in India.” Hastings Law Journal 55 (2003): 789.

Baxi, Upendra. “Taking suffering seriously: Social action litigation in the Supreme Court of India.” Third World Legal Stud. (1985): 107.

Sood, Avani. “Gender Justice Through Public Interest Litigation: Case Studies from India.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 41 (2008).

Gauri, Varun. “Fundamental Rights and Public Interest Litigation in India: Overreaching or Underachieving?.” Indian Journal of Law and Economics 1.1 (2011).

Baxi, Upendra. “Who Bothers about the Supreme Court? The Problem of Impact of Judicial Decisions.” The Journal of the Indian Law Institute 24.4 (1982): 848-62.

Speeches

Bhagwati, P.N. “India’s Judicial review – social for motor democratization”. Organization of Professional Associations. BMICH, Sri Lanka. 26 September 2003.

 

3 Comments

  1. In constitution of India there is provision that there will be no discrimination on any ground viz cast, sex, creed etc. yet there are different criterions for retirement age of public servants:
    1. Central government /Public sector undertakings & Public sector bank employees retire from service on attaining age of 60 years
    2. Many categories of staff retire at age of 62 years e. g. school Teachers
    3. Others retire at 65 years age i.e. college teachers & Judges etc
    4. Still others retire at age of 70 years e.g. Professors / Senior doctors of All India Institute of medical sciences & Indian Institute of Technology, vice chancellor & deputy vice chancellor of Delhi University etc
    We feel these anomalies need rectification through filing public interest litigation in Supreme Court of India praying for uniform retirement age for all cadres of government emplyoees

  2. Dear Sir,

    Many people from middle class who are salaried employee and are staying in rented accommodation are facing a new harassment from the IT dept. Yes I mean it, its no less than a harassment and also financial burden.

    Let me explain,

    As per the new law initiated by IT dept from Oct 2013, it is mandatory to provide PAN details of landlord for any rent paid more than Rs.100,000 per year. It comes down to Rs.8,333/month. This is really cruel for all.

    Now what is cruel in this?
    1. PAN details are not shared by many landlords as they do not want to pay Tax
    2. In absence of PAN need a declaration from landlord, which is again refused by him. Fact is he have PAN card and do not want to share.
    3. Also, many landlords ask to pay through cash

    He cannot force him to share PAN as there is no law for it.
    He cannot report to IT dept on this as there is no mechanism.

    What’s happening, people either need to claim just Rs.8000 as there HRA claim and burn out there hard earned money as Tax, even though he is paying higher rent.

    You can read out more in below links.
    http://moranil.quora.com/Whats-wrong-with-new-HRA-rule-in-india

    http://zeenews.india.com/exclusive/new-hra-exemption-rule-how-it-will-affect-you_6780.html

    Request if anyone can raise this public concern in PIL as it is not good and many citizen are badly affected by this.

  3. I am agitated over the lenient view taken by the Election Commission of India over Shri Sharad Pawar instigating (this may not be a correct word) the voters to vote doubly. Shri Pawar is a minister and under oath to protect the sovereignty of our Country. According to me the punishment should have been severe. Otherwise everybody would be free to spoil the most important and pius duty of electioneering. Do I have a recourse to PIL. Kindly guide me.

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.