Public Interest Litigation as A Tool of Good Governance A Critical Analysis

Abstract

newline India is a Democratic and Parliamentary form of government with a legislative, executive, and judiciary as its organs. The Legislature makes the laws, the Executive implements the laws and the Judiciary interprets the laws. As per, the theory of Separation of Power all three organs must work within their specified area, and no one is authorized to usurp the jurisdiction of another. However, in order to restrict supremacy or absoluteness the theory of Check and Balance was developed. Primarily, the Judiciary works as an interpreter of the law, they are not authorized to create or make laws. In the saying of Benjamin Cardozo, Judges cannot work in a watertight compartment or as a mere declarator. Society is progressing time and again and to meet the needs of society, the law must act as a social engineer. Judges must be involved in a judicial process and do creativity to fill the lacuna developed by the Legislature or the Executive. Thus, Judges must not only declare the law but also create or make the law to protect our constitutional principles. The Judiciary while doing social engineering adopted the Activist character and while doing so evolved the concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by liberalizing the general rule of Locus Standi i.e., the right to bring cases before the court. To put it simply, Public Interest Litigation means that any public-spirited citizen can move and approach the court for the public cause (or public interest or public welfare) by filing a petition in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution or in the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution or before the Court of Magistrate under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.