Meaning and Concept of PIL

Meaning and Concept of PIL

·         “Public interest Litigation”, in simple words, means, litigation field in a court of law, for the protection of “Public Interest” (nebulous entity), such as pollution, Terrorism, Road safety, constructional hazards etc.

·         Article 32 of the Indian Constitution contains the tool which directly joins the public with the judiciary. 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.

·         Although, the main and only focus of such litigation is only “Public Interest” there are various areas where a PIL can be filed. It is litigation which can be introduced in a court of law, not only by the aggrieved party but also by the court itself (suo moto) or by any other private party.

        “Public Interest Litigation means a legal action initiated in a court of law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which the public or class of the community have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected”.

·         In the case of People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, it was held that “Public Interest Litigation which is a strategic arm of the legal aid movement and which is intended to bring justice within the reach of the poor masses, who constitute the low visibility area of humanity, is a totally different kind of litigation from the ordinary traditional litigation which is essentially of an adversary character where there is a dispute between two parties, one making a claim or seeing relief against the other and that other opposing such claim or relief.

·          Public interest litigation is brought before the court not for the purpose of enforcing the right of one individual against another as happens in the case of ordinary litigation, but it is intended to promote and vindicate public interest which demands that violations of constitutional or legal rights of large numbers of people who are poor, ignorant or in a socially or economically disadvantaged position should not go unnoticed and un-redressed.

·          That would be destructive of the Rule of Law which forms one of the essential elements of public interest in any democratic form of government.

·          The Rule of Law does not mean that the protection of the law must be available only to a fortunate few or that the law should be allowed to be prostituted by the vested interests for protecting and upholding the status quo under the guise of enforcement of their civil and political rights.

·         The poor too have civil and political rights and the Rule of Law is meant for them also, though today it exists only on paper and not in reality."

HISTORY OF PIL IN INDIA 

A. ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF PIL

·         The term "PIL" originated in the United States in the mid-1980s. Since the nineteenth century, various movements in that country had contributed to public interest law, which was part of the legal aid movement.

·         The first legal aid office was established in New York in 1876.

·          In the 1960s the PIL movement began to receive financial support from the office of Economic Opportunity, This encouraged lawyers and public spirited persons to take up cases of the under-privileged and fight against dangers to environment and public health and exploitation of consumers and the weaker sections.

·         The origin and evolution of Public Interest Litigation in India emanated from realization of constitutional obligation by the Judiciary towards the vast sections of the society - the poor and the marginalized sections of the society.

·          Prior to 1980s the aggrieved party could personally knock the doors of justice and seek remedy for his grievance and any other person who was not personally affected could not knock the doors of justice as a proxy for the victim or the aggrieved party.

·          In other words, only the affected parties had the locus standi (standing required in law) to file a case and continue the litigation and the non-affected persons had no locus standing to do so.

·         And as a result, there was hardly any link between the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of Indian Union and the laws made by the legislature on the one hand and the vast majority of illiterate, citizens on the other.

·         The scenario gradually changed when the post emergency Supreme Court tackled the problem of access to justice by people through radical changes and alterations made in the requirements of locus standi and of party aggrieved.

·         The splendid efforts of Justice P N Bhagwati and Justice V R Krishna Iyer were instrumental of this juristic revolution of eighties to convert the Apex Court of India into a Supreme Court for all Indians.

·         Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer and P. N. Bhagwati recognised the possibility of providing access to justice to the poor and the exploited people by relaxing the rules of standing.

·         PIL emerged as a result of an informal nexus of pro-active judges, media persons and social activists. This trend shows starke difference between the traditional justice delivery system and the modern informal justice system where the judiciary is performing administrative judicial role.

·          PIL is necessary rejection of laissez faire notions of traditional jurisprudence.

·         The first reported case of PIL in 1979 focused on the inhuman conditions of prisons and under trial prisoners.

·         In HussainaraKhatoon v. State of Bihar, the PIL was filed by an advocate on the basis of the news item published in the Indian Express, highlighting the plight of thousands of under trial prisoners languishing in various jails in Bihar.

·         A new era of the PIL movement was heralded by Justice P.N. Bhagawati in the case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India.

·         In this case it was held that "any member of the public or social action group acting bonafide" can invoke the Writ Jurisdiction of the High Courts or the Supreme Court seeking redressal against violation of a legal or constitutional rights of persons who due to social or economic or any other disability cannot approach the Court.

·          By this judgment PIL became a potent weapon for the enforcement of "public duties" where executed in action or misdeed resulted in public injury. And as a result any citizen of India or any consumer groups or social action groups can now approach the apex court of the country seeking legal remedies in all cases where the interests of general public or a section of public are at stake.

Types of PIL

The following are the subjects which may be litigated under the head of Public Interest Litigation:

·         MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST

·         (I)bonded labour matters

·         (ii) matters of neglected children

·         (iii) exploitation of casual labourers and non-payment of wages to them (except in individual cases)

·         (iv) matters of harassment or torture of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Economically Backward Classes, either by co-villagers or by police

·         (v) matters relating to environmental pollution, disturbance of ecolczical balance, drugs, food adulteration, maintenance of heritage and culture, antiques, forests and wild life,

·         (vi) petitions from riot victims.

·         MATTERS OF PRIVATE NATURE

(i)                   threat to or harassment of the petitioner by private persons,

(ii)                  seeking enquiry by an agency other than local police,

(iii)                 (iii) seeking police protection,

(iv)               (iv) land lord tenant dispute

(v)                  (v) service matters,

(vi)               (vi) admission to medical or engineering colleges,

(vii)              (vii) early hearing of matters pending in High Court and subordinate courts and are not considered matters of public interest.

·         LETTER PETITIONS

·         Petitions received by post even though not in public interest can be treated as writ petitions if so directed by the Hon'ble Judge nominated for this purpose.

·         Individual petitions complaining harassment or torture or death in jail or by police, complaints of atrocities on women such as harassment for dowry, bride burning, rape, murder and kidnapping, complaints relating to family pensions and complaints of refusal by police to register the case can be registered as writ petitions, if so approved by the concerned Hon’ble Judge.

·          If deemed expedient, a report from the concerned authority is called before placing the matter before the Hon’ble Judge for directions.

·         If so directed by the Hon’ble Judge, the letter is registered as a writ petition and is thereafter listed before the Court for hearing.

The debate over label: PIL or social action litigation?

·         Given that the birth of PIL in India was connected to the evolution of PIL in the United States, it was natural for scholars to draw comparisons between the US experience and the Indian experience.

·          One result of this comparison was that it was argued that PIL in India should be labeled as social action litigation (SAL).

·         Baxi was the key scholar who mooted for such indigenous labelling of PIL because of its distinctive characteristics.

·         He contended that whereas PIL in the United States has focused on "civic participation in governmental decision making", the Indian PIL discourse was directed against "state re repression or governmental lawlessness" and was focused primarily on the rural poor.

·          Writing in the early 1980s, Baxi highlighted another contrast: that unlike India, PIL in the United States sought to represent "interests without groups" such as consumerism or environment. 

·         At least two comments could be made about the desire to designate PIL as SAL.

·         First, the term "social action" probably implied the role that law could/should play in social engineering.

·         However, considering that in PIL cases judges (rather than the legislature) play a key role and the law is judge-made law, one should not over-estimate what courts could deliver through PIL/ SAL in a democracy.

·         No doubt, courts could help in providing an official recognition to the voices of minorities or destitute that might be ignored otherwise, but it would be unrealistic to expect that they could achieve social transformation on their own.

·         Secondly, as we will note in the next section, the character of the PIL in India has changed a lot in the second phase in that now it is not limited to espousing the interests of disadvantaged sections of society or to redressing state repression and governmental lawlessness.

·          In fact, in the second phase, the focus of PIL in India has shifted from poor to the middle class and from redressing state exploitation of disadvantaged groups to pleas for civic participation in governance.

·         Although there are still differences between how the PIL jurisprudence has unfolded in the United States and India, the distinction as to the subject-matter or the basic objective of the PIL is not that much as it used to be when an argument was made to label PIL as SAL.

The three phases of PIL

·         At the risk of over-simplification and overlap, the PIL discourse in India could be divided, in my view, into three broad phases. One will notice that these three phases differ from each other in terms of at least the following four variables:

·         who initiated PIL cases;

·         what was the subject matter/focus of PIL;

·         whom the relief was sought; and

·          how judiciary responded to PIL cases.

In the first phase - which began in the late 1970s and continued through the 1980s –

·         The PIL cases were generally filed by public-spirited persons (lawyers, journalists, social activists or academics).

·         Most of the cases related to the rights of disadvantaged sections of society such as child labourers, bonded labourers, prisoners, mentally challenged, dwellers, and women.

·         The relief was sought against the action or non-action on the part of executive agencies resulting in violations of FRs under the Constitution.

·          During this phase, the judiciary responded by recognizing the rights of these people and giving directions to the government to redress the alleged violations.

·         In short, it is arguable that in the first phase, the PIL truly became an instrument of the type of social transformation/revolution that the founding fathers had expected to achieve through the Constitution.

The second phase of the PIL was in the 1990s during which several significant changes in the chemistry of PIL took place.

·         In comparison to the first phase, the filing of PIL cases became more institutionalized in that several specialized NGOs and lawyers started bringing matters of public interest to the courts on a much regular basis.

·         The breadth of issues raised in PIL also expanded tremendously – from the protection of environment to corruption-free administration, right to education, sexual harassment at the workplace, relocation of industries, rule of law, good governance, and the general accountability of the Government.

·          It is to be noted that in this phase, the petitioners sought relief not only against /non-action of the executive but also against private individuals, in relation to policy matters, and regarding something that would clearly fall within the domain of the legislature.

·         The response of the judiciary during the second phase was by and large much bolder and unconventional than the first phase.

·         For instance, the courts did not hesitate to come up with detailed guidelines where there were legislative not hesitate to come up with detailed guidelines where there were legislative gaps.

·         The courts enforced FRs against private individuals and granted relief to the petitioner without going into the question of whether the violator of the FR was the state.

·         The courts also took non-compliance with its orders more seriously and in some cases, went to the extent of monitoring government investigative agencies and/or punishing civil servants for contempt for failing to abide by their directions.

·         The second phase was also the period when the misuse of PIL not only began but also reached to a disturbing level, which occasionally compelled the courts to impose fine on plaintiffs for misusing PIL for private purposes.

On the other hand, the third phase-the current phase, which began with the 21^st century – is a period in which anyone could file a PIL for almost anything.

·       It seems that there is a further expansion of issues that could be raised as PIL, e.g. calling back the Indian cricket team from the Australia tour and preventing an alleged marriage of an actress with trees for astrological reasons.

·      From the judiciary’s point of views, one could argue that it is time for judicial introspection and for reviewing what courts tried to achieve through PIL.

·         As compared to the second phase, the judiciary has seemingly shown more restraint in issuing directions to the government.

·          Although the judiciary is unlikely to roll back the expansive scope of possible that it might make more measured interventions in the future.

·         It seems that the judicial attitude towards PIL in these phases is a response, at least in part, to how it perceived to be the “issue(s) in vogue”.

·          If rights of prisoners, pavement dwellers, child/bonded labourers and women were in focus in the first phase, issues such as environment, AIDS, corruption and good governance were at the forefront in second phase, and development and free market considerations might dominate the third phase.

·         So, the way courts have reacted to PIL in India is merely a reflection of what people expected from the judiciary at any given point of time.

·         If the judiciary deviates too much from the prevailing social expectations, it might not command the public support that it requires to sustain PIL.

Impetus for PIL

        A number of factors contributed to the robust development of PIL in India.

The first factor has already been noted above, that is, the constitutional framework relating to FRs and DPs. It is clear that because of FRs and DPs the Indian judiciary would have enjoyed a comparative advantage in anchoring PIL vis-à-vis courts of those jurisdictions (such as the United Kingdom and Australia) where there was no Bill of Right).

Secondly, several constitutional provisions concerning the powers of the Supreme Court helped the Court in coming up with innovative and unconventional remedies, which in turn raised social expectations. For instance, a provision which allowed the Supreme Court to pass any order for “doing complete justice” proved more than handy in PIL cases. The Constitution also provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts and that “all authorities, civil and judicial, in territory of India shall act in aid of the Supreme Court”.

Thirdly, the rise of PIL corresponds to the extent and level of judicial activism shown by the Indian Supreme Court and High Courts. Through its activism over the years, the Indian Supreme Court has arguably become the most powerful court in the world.

Some major instances of activism, which directly provided impetus to PIL are:

·         introducing the due process requirement in art.21, despite its rejection by the Constituent Assembly;

·          employing DPs to create new FRs;

·         reading implied limitations in form of basic features on the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution,

·          declaring judicial review a basic feature on the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution,

·         declaring judicial review a basic feature of the Constitution; and

·          becoming, in effect, a self-appointed judiciary with almost no real constitutional checks. Because of these landmark decisions, the judiciary became almost untouchable and chartered its PIL path subject only to self-restraints.

Fourthly, Through PIL the judiciary tried to fill in a governance vacuum and sought to do what the two branches of the government should have done but did not do.

Last but least, being a democratic country, the civil society in India easily grabbed the opportunity to participate in governance through PIL cases. Civil society also found that PIL could help them in highlighting social issues/causes much more quickly rather than achieving the same result through long social campaigns.

Positive contributions

        As the positive contributions of PIL in India are well-known and well-documented, only some of the main contributions are noted here briefly.

·         The most important contribution of PIL, has been to bring courts closer to the disadvantaged sections of society such as prisoners, destitute, child or bonded labourers, women, and scheduled castes/ tribes.

·         By taking up the issues affecting these people, PIL truly became a vehicle to bring social revolution through constitutional means, something that the founding fathers had hoped.

·         Equally important is the part played by PIL in expanding the jurisprudence of fundamental (human) rights in India. As noted before, DPs are not justiciable but the courts imported some of these principles into the FRs thus making various socio-economic rights as important – at least in theory – as civil and political rights. This resulted in the legal recognition of rights as important as education, health, livelihood, pollution-free environment, privacy and speedy trial.

·         As we have seen before, in the second phase, the PIL became an instrument to promote rule of law, demand fairness and transparency, fight corruption in administration, and enhance the overall accountability of the government agencies. The underlying justification for these public demands and the judicial intervention was to strengthen constitutionalism – a constant desire of the civil society to keep government powers under check. This resulted in the judiciary giving directions to the government to follow its constitutional obligations.

·         Through PIL, judiciary also triggered legislative reforms and filled in legislative gaps in important areas.

Just to illustrate

·         Supreme Court in the Vishaka case laid down detailed guidelines on sexual harassment at the workplace.

·         Similarly welcome, were guidelines on arrest and detention laid down by the Court in Basu.

·         Supreme court legislated on ethunasia

·         The Indian judiciary, courtesy of PIL, has helped in cooling down a few controversial policy questions on which the society was sharply divided. One could not the controversy about the reservation of seats for SCs/STs d other backwards classes in employment or educations institutions, the government liberalisationd privatisation and the contested height of the Narmada dares as examples of this kind of contribution.

·         On a theoretical level, PIL has helped the Indian judiciary to gain public confidence and establish legitimacy in the society. The role of an independent judiciary in a democracy is of course important. But given that judges are neither elected by public nor are they accountable to public or their representatives ordinarily, the judiciary in a democracy is susceptible to public criticism for representing the elite or being undemocratic and anti-majoritarian. Therefore, it becomes critical for the judiciary to be seen by the public to be not only independent but also in touch with social realities.

·         One positive contribution of PIL in India, which has extended outside the Indian territory, deserves a special mention. The Indian PIL jurisprudence has also contributed to the trans-judicial influence—especially in South Asia—in that courts in Pakistan Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal have cited Indian PIL cases to develop their own PIL jurisprudence. In a few cases, even Hong Kong courts have cited Indian PIL cases, in particular cases dealing with environmental issues.

The dark side

        PIL has, however, as an unanticipated increase in the workload of the superior courts, lack of judicial infrastructure to determine factual matters between the promise and reality, abuse of process, fiction and confrontation with fellow organs of the government, and dangers inherent in judicial populism. Before elaborating these problems, let me take readers to a quick tour of some recent PIL cases that would offer an indication of this dark side.

A quick tour of some recent PIL cases

        In the last three decades, the Indian Supreme Court and High Courts have been approached through PIL to redress a variety of issues, not all of which related to alleged violation of FRs. The judiciary, for instance, has addressed issues such as:

·         the constitutionality of the Government’s privatisation and disinvestment policies,

·         defacing of rocks by painted advertisements,

·         the danger to the Taj Mahal from a refinery,

·         pollution of rivers, relocation of industries out of Delhi,

·         lack of access to food, deaths due to starvation, use of environment-friendly fuel in Delhi buses and

·         regulation of traffic,

·         out-of-turn allotment of government accommodation,

·         prohibition of smoking in public places, arbitrary allotment of petrol outlets,

·          investigation of alleged bribe taking, employment of children in hazardous industries,

·         rights of children and bonded labours, extent of the right to strike, right to health,

·         right to education, sexual harassment in the workplace, and female foeticide and infanticide through modern technology.

Although a review of the above sample of PIL cases may surprise those who are not familiar with PIL in India, it should be noted that in all the above cases the judiciary did actually entertain the PIL and took these cases to their logical conclusion. But there have been instances of more blatant misuse of the process of PIL.

For instance,

·         the courts were approached to call back the Indian cricket team from Australia after the controversial Sydney test match.

·          PILs were initiated to regulate the treatment of wild monkeys in Delhi

·          and the practice of private schools to conduct admission interviews for very young children.

·          A PIL was also field in the Supreme Court to seek ban on the publication of allegedly obscene and nude photographs in newspapers.

·         Some so-called public-spirited lawyers knocked at the door of the courts against:

·         (i) Richard Gere’s public kissing of an Indian actress, Ms. Shilpa Shetty;

·          (ii) an alleged indecent live stage show on New Year’s Eve; and

·          (iii) the marriage of former Miss World, Ms Aishwarya Rai, with a tree to overcome certain astrological obstacles in her marriage.

The dark side

        It seems that the misuse of PIL in India, which started in the 1990s has reached to such a stage where it has started undermining the very purpose for which PIL was introduced. In other words, the dark side is slowly moving to overshadow the bright side of the PIL project.

·         Ulterior purpose: public in PIL stands substituted by private or publicity  

        "PIL is being misused by people agitating for private grievances in the grab of public interest and seeking publicity rather than espousing public causes."

         

·         Inefficient use of limited judicial resources

        If properly managed, the PIL has the potential to contribute to an efficient disposal of people's grievances. But considering that the number of per capita judges in India is much lower than many other countries and given that the Indian Supreme Court as well as High Court are facing a backlog of cases, it is puzzling why the courts have not one enough to stop non-genuine PIL cases. In fact, by allowing frivolous PIL plaintiffs to waste the time and energy of the courts, the judiciary might be violating the right to speedy trial-of those who are waiting or the vindication of their private interests through conventional adversarial litigation.

·         Judicial populism

        Judges are human beings, but it would be unfortunate if they admit PIL cases on account of raising an issue that is (or might become) popular in the society. Conversely, the desire to become people’s judges in a democracy should not hinder admitting PIL cases which involve an important public interest but are potentially unpopular.

       

·         Symbolic justice

        Another major problem with the PIL project in India has been of PIL cases often doing only symbolic justice.

 Two facets of this problem could be noted here.

·         First, judiciary is often unable to ensure that its guidelines or directions in PIL cases are complied with, for instance, regarding sexual harassment at workplace (Vishaka case) or the procedure of arrest by police (D.K. Basu case

       

·         The second instance of symbolic justice is provided by the futility of over-conversion of DPs into FRs and thus making them justiciable. Not much is gained by recognizing rights which cannot be enforced or fulfilled.

·         Disturbing the constitutional balance of power

        Although the Indian Constitution does not follow any strict separation of powers, it still embodies the doctrine of checks and balances, which even the judiciary should respect. However, the judiciary on several occasions did not exercise self-restraints and moved on to legislate, settle policy questions, take over governance, or monitor executive agencies. Jain cautions against such tendency: 

·         Overuse-induced non-seriousness

        PIL should not be the first step in redressing all kinds of grievances even if they involve public interest. In order to remain effective, PIL should not be allowed to become a routine affair which is not taken seriously by the Bench, the Bar, and most importantly by the masses:

        “The overuse of PIL for every conceivable public interest might dilute the original commitment to use this remedy only for enforcing human rights of the victimized and the disadvantaged groups.”

        If civil society and disadvantaged groups lose faith in the efficacy of PIL, that would sound a death knell for it.

Checking the dark side

        One might ask if the dark side of PIL is so visible, why has something not been done about this by the government or the judiciary?

·         An attempt to curb the misuse of the PIL was made, though not strictly on the part of the Government, in 1996 when a private member Bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha, the Upper House of the Indian Parliament. The Public Interest Litigation (Regulation) Bill had proposed that petitioners filing frivolous PIL cases should be “put behind bars and pay the damages.”

·         However, the Bill – which raised concerns of interfering with judicial independence – could not receive the support of all political parties. As the Bill lapsed, this attempt to control the misuse of PIL failed.

On the other hand, the judiciary too is well-aware of the problems associated with PIL and has responded to the dark side of PIL in two ways.

·         First, the Indian Supreme Court as well as High Courts have tried to send strong messages on a case-to-case basis whenever they noticed that the process of PIL was misused. In some cases, the courts have gone to the extent of imposing a fine on plaintiffs who abused the judicial process. On a few occasions, the Supreme Court also expressed its displeasure on how the High Courts have admitted PIL cases.

·         The second, and a more systematic, step that the Supreme Court has taken was to compile a set of “Guidelines to be Followed for Entertaining Letters/Petitions Received by it as PIL”. The Guidelines, which were based on the full-court decision of December 1, 1988, have been modified on the order/directions of the Chief Justice of India in 1993 and 2003.

The Guidelines provide that ordinarily letter/petitions falling under one of the following 10 categories will be entertained as PIL:

(1)     bonded labour matters;

(2)     neglected children;

(3)     non-payment of minimum wages;

(4)     petitions from jails complaining of harassment, death in jail, speedy trial as a fundamental right, etc.;

(5)     petitions against police for refusing to register a case, harassment by police and death in police custody;

(6)     petitions against atrocities on women, in particular harassment of bride, bride-burning, rape, murder, kidnapping, etc.;

(7)     petitions complaining harassment or torture of persons belonging to scheduled caste and scheduled tribes;

(8)     petitions pertaining to environmental pollution, disturbance of ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, maintenance of heritage and culture, antiques, forest and wildlife and other matters of public importance;

(9)     petitions from riot-victims; and

(10) family pensions

        The Guidelines also prescribe that petitions related to certain matters – such as related to landlord-tenant matters, service matters and admission to educational institutions – will “not” be admitted as PIL.

The PIL Cell has been entrusted the task of screening letter/petitions as per these Guidelines and then placing them before a judge to be nominated by the Chief Justice of India.

       

Conclusion

        PIL has an important role to play in the civil justice system in that it affords a ladder to justice to disadvantaged sections of society, some of which might not even be well-informed their rights. Furthermore, it provides an avenue, to enforce diffused rights for which either it is difficult to identify an aggrieved person or where aggrieved persons have no incentives to knock at the doors of the courts. PIL could also contribute to good governance by keeping the government accountable. Last but not least, PIL enables civil society to play an active role in spreading social awareness about human rights, in providing voice to the marginalized sections of society, and in allowing their participation in government decision making.

LOK ADALAT

·         The concept of Lok Adalat is an innovative Indian contribution to the world of jurisprudence. The introduction of Lok Adalats added a new chapter to the justice dispensation system of this country and succeeded in providing a supplementary forum to the victims for satisfactory settlement of their disputes.

·         This system is based on Gandhian principles.

·         The advent of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 gave a statutory status to Lok Adalats, pursuant to-the constitutional mandate in Article 39-A of the Constitution of India, contains various provisions for settlement of disputes through Lok Adalat.

·          It is an Act to constitute legal services authorities to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities, and to organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity.

·          Even before the enforcement of the Act, the concept of Lok Adalat has been getting wide acceptance as People's Courts the very name signifies.

·          Settlement of disputes at the hands of Panchayat Heads or tribal vogue since ancient times. When statutory recognition had been given to Lok Adalat, it was specifically provided that the award passed by the Lok Adalat formulating the terms of compromise will have the force of decree of a court which can be executed as a civil court decree.

·          The evolution of movement called Lok Adalat was a part of the strategy to relieve heavy burden on the Courts with pending cases and to give relief to the litigants who were in a queue to get justice.

·         It contains various provisions for settlement of disputes through Lok Adalat.

Salient features of Lok Adalat:

1.       It is based on settlement or compromise reached through systematic negotiations.

2.       It is a win-win system where all the parties to the dispute have something to gain.

3.       It is one among the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) systems. It is an alternative to “Judicial Justice”.

4.       It is economical – No court fee is payable. If any court fee is paid, it will be refunded.

5.       The parties to a dispute can interact directly with the presiding officer, which is not possible in the case of a court proceeding.

6.       Lok Adalat is deemed to be a civil court for certain purposes.

7.       Lok Adalat is having certain powers of a civil court.

8.       The award passed by the Lok Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a civil court.

9.       An award passed by the Lok Adalat is final and no appeal is maintainable from it.

10.    An award passed by the Lok Adalat can be executed in a court.

11.    The award can be passed by Lok Adalat, only after obtaining the assent of all the parties to dispute.

12.    Code of Civil Procedure and Indian Evidence Act are not applicable to the proceedings of Lok Adalat.

13.    A Permanent Lok Adalat can pass an award on merits, even without the consent of parties. Such an award is final and binding. From that no appeal is possible.

14.    The appearance of lawyers on behalf of the parties, at the Lok Adalat is not barred. (Regulation 39 of the Kerala State Legal Services Authority Regulations, 1998.)

Lok Adalats have competence to deal with a number of cases like:

•          Compoundable civil, revenue, and criminal cases

•          Motor accident compensation claims cases

•          Partition Claims

•          Damages Cases

•          Matrimonial and family disputes

•          Mutation of lands case

•          Land Pattas cases

•          Bonded Labour cases

•          Land acquisition disputes

•          Bank's unpaid loan cases

•          Arrears of retirement benefits cases

•          Family Court cases

•          Cases which are not sub-judice

Procedure

·         The procedure followed at a Lok Adalat is very simple and shorn of almost all legal formalism and rituals.

·          The Lok Adalat is presided over by a sitting or retired judicial officer as the chairman, with two other members, usually a lawyer and a social worker.

·          It is revealed by experience that in Lok Adalats it is easier to settle money claims since in most such cases the quantum alone may be in dispute.

·         Thus the motor accident compensation claim cases are brought before the Lok Adalat and a number of cases were disposed of in each Lok Adalat.

·         One important condition is that both parties in dispute should agree for settlement through Lok Adalat and abide by its decision.

·         A Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to settle, by way of effecting compromise between the parties, any matter which may be pending before any court, as well as matters at pre-litigative stage i.e., disputes which have not yet been formally instituted in any Court of Law.

·         Such matters may be civil or criminal in nature, but any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law cannot be decided by the Lok Adalat even if the parties involved therein agree to settle the same.

·          Lok Adalats can take cognizance of matters involving not only those persons who are entitled to avail free legal services but of all other persons also, be they women, men, or children and even institutions.

·         Anyone, or more of the parties to a dispute can move an application to the court where their matter may be pending, or even at pre-litigative stage, for such matter being taken up in the Lok Adalat where upon the Lok Adalat Bench constituted for the purpose shall attempt to resolve the dispute by helping the parties to arrive at an amicable solution and once it is successful in doing so, the award passed by it shall be final which has as much force as a decree of a Civil Court obtained after due contest.

·         The award of the Lok Adalat is fictionally deemed to be decree of Court and therefore the courts have all the powers in relation thereto as it has in relation to a decree passed by itself.

·          This includes the powers to extend time in appropriate cases. The award passed by the Lok Adalat is the decision of the court itself though arrived 'at by the simpler method of conciliation instead of the process of arguments in court.

·         Benefits of Lok Adalat

        The benefits that litigants derive through the Lok Adalats are many.

a)       First, there is no court fee and even if the case is already filed in the regular court, the fee paid will be refunded if the dispute is settled at the Lok Adalat.

b)       Secondly, there is no strict application of the procedural laws and the Evidence Act while assessing the merits of the claim by the Lok Adalat. The parties to the disputes though represented by their advocates can interact with the Lok Adalat judge directly and explain their stand in the dispute and the reasons therefore, which is not possible in a regular court of law.

c)       Thirdly, disputes can be brought before the Lok Adalat directly instead of going to a regular court first and then to the Lok Adalat.

d)       Fourthly, the decision of the Lok Adalat is binding on the parties to the dispute and its order is capable of execution through legal process. No appeal lies against the order of the Lok Adalat whereas in the regular law courts there is always a scope to appeal to the higher forum on the decision of the trial court, which causes delay in the settlement of the dispute finally. The reason being that in a regular court, decision is that of the court but in Lok Adalat it is mutual settlement and hence no case for appeal will arise. In every respect the scheme of Lok Adalat is a boon to the litigant public, where they can get their disputes settled fast and free of cost.

e)       Last but not the least, it has faster and inexpensive remedy with legal status.

·         The system has received laurels from the parties involved in particular and public and the legal functionaries, in general.

·         It Also helps in emergence of jurisprudence of peace in the larger interest of justice and wider sections of society.

·          Its process is voluntary and works on the principle that both parties to the disputes are willing to sort out their disputes by amicable solutions. Through this mechanism, disputes can be settled in a simpler, quicker and cost-effective way at all the three stages i.e., pre-litigation, pending-litigation and post-litigation.

·         The scheme also helps the overburdened Court to alleviate the burden of arrears of cases and as the award becomes final and binding on both the parties, no appeal is filed in the Appellate Court and, as such, the burden of the Appellate Court in hierarchy is also reduced.

·         The scheme is not only helpful to the parties, but also to the overburdened Courts to achieve the constitutional goal of speedy disposal of the cases.

·         About 90% of the cases filed in the developed countries are settled mutually by conciliation, mediation, etc. and, as such, only 10% of the cases are decided by the Courts there.

·         In our country, which is developing, has unlike the developed countries, number of Judges disproportionate to the cases filed and, hence, to alleviate the accumulation of cases, the Lok Adalat is the need of the day.

Criticism

·         The right to appeal is one of the most basic features of any sound legal system. It sprouts from the principle ‘to err is human’.

·         It recognizes the fact that it is impossible to be infalliable always.

·          Lok Adalats cannot proceed to pass awards unless the parties to a dispute under its consideration, agrees to the passing of an award.

·         In such a situation, by agreeing, the parties are stopping themselves from challenging it afterwards

·         In that case, denial of an appeal provision can well be justified.

·         But a Permanent Lok Adalat can proceed to dispose of matter referred to it even without the consent of the parties to such dispute.

·         And the PLA does not have to go by the rules of evidence contained in The Indian Evidence Act. Moreover, a party can be drawn to PLA, despite his wishes.

·         In such a situation, denying a chance to appeal may not be in consonance with our most cherished legal principle: Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.

Lok Adalat settles 1.25 cr. cases in a day dec 2014

•The Second National Lok Adalat held across the country recently settled about 1.25 crore pending and pre-litigation cases and brought financial relief of over Rs. 3,000 crore to ordinary litigants in a single day.

•           Organized by: The National Legal Service Authority (NALSA)