Question:
Where a legal wrong or a legal injury is caused to a person or to a determinate class of persons by reason of violation of any constitutional or legal right or any burden is imposed in contravention of any constitutional or legal provision or without authority of law or any such legal wrong or legal injury or illegal burden is threatened and some person or class of persons is unable to approach the court for relief, any member of the public can maintain an application for an appropriate direction, order or writ in the High Court under Article 226 and in case any breach of fundamental rights of such persons or determinate class of persons, in this court under Article 32 seeking judicial redress for the legal wrong or legal injury caused to such person or determinate class of persons.” – Justice Bhagwati in the case of:
Where a legal wrong or a legal injury is caused to a person or to a determinate class of persons by reason of violation of any constitutional or legal right or any burden is imposed in contravention of any constitutional or legal provision or without authority of law or any such legal wrong or legal injury or illegal burden is threatened and some person or class of persons is unable to approach the court for relief, any member of the public can maintain an application for an appropriate direction, order or writ in the High Court under Article 226 and in case any breach of fundamental rights of such persons or determinate class of persons, in this court under Article 32 seeking judicial redress for the legal wrong or legal injury caused to such person or determinate class of persons.” – Justice Bhagwati in the case of:
Show Hint
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) allows individuals or organizations to seek judicial intervention on behalf of disadvantaged persons or classes of society.
Updated On: Nov 29, 2025
- Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India
- Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of West Bengal
- S.P. Gupta Vs Union of India
- Janata Dal Vs H.S. Chowdhary
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding the case.
The case of Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India expanded the concept of public interest litigation (PIL). It laid down the principle that a member of the public can approach the court on behalf of those unable to approach it for themselves due to reasons such as poverty, helplessness, or social/economic disadvantage.
Step 2: Explanation of the options.
- (a) Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India: This is the correct case where the Supreme Court allowed a PIL by a member of the public on behalf of a disadvantaged group.
- (b) Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of West Bengal: This case is related to the rights of individuals under Article 21 but does not address PIL as discussed by Justice Bhagwati.
- (c) S.P. Gupta Vs Union of India: This case relates to judicial appointments and does not address PIL under Article 32 or 226.
- (d) Janata Dal Vs H.S. Chowdhary: This case does not involve PIL or the issue discussed in the question.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Thus, the correct answer is (a) Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India.
The case of Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India expanded the concept of public interest litigation (PIL). It laid down the principle that a member of the public can approach the court on behalf of those unable to approach it for themselves due to reasons such as poverty, helplessness, or social/economic disadvantage.
Step 2: Explanation of the options.
- (a) Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India: This is the correct case where the Supreme Court allowed a PIL by a member of the public on behalf of a disadvantaged group.
- (b) Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State of West Bengal: This case is related to the rights of individuals under Article 21 but does not address PIL as discussed by Justice Bhagwati.
- (c) S.P. Gupta Vs Union of India: This case relates to judicial appointments and does not address PIL under Article 32 or 226.
- (d) Janata Dal Vs H.S. Chowdhary: This case does not involve PIL or the issue discussed in the question.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Thus, the correct answer is (a) Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs Union of India.
Was this answer helpful?
0
1
Top Questions on Public Interest Litigation
- Which of the following public interest litigations expanded Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to include the right to enjoyment of pollution-free water and air?
- AIBE - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public Interest Litigation
- Which Public Interest Litigation case resulted in the Supreme Court of India laying down the principle of 'Absolute Liability'?
- AIBE - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public Interest Litigation
- Under which provision of the Indian Constitution can a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) be filed directly in the Supreme Court?
- AIBE - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public Interest Litigation
- Which of the following is the primary objective of the "Public Interest Litigation" (PIL) in India?
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public Interest Litigation
- The concept of 'Public Interest Litigation' (PIL) was first introduced in India by which of the following cases?
- TS LAWCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public Interest Litigation
View More Questions
Questions Asked in AIBE exam
- A Statement is followed by two Conclusions, I and II.
Statement: According to the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, the Government credits ₹15,000 to the Rehabilitation Fund for each child or adolescent for whom fine has been recovered from the employer. This amount may be deposited or invested, and the interest is also payable to the child or adolescent.
Conclusions:
I. The child or adolescent is entitled not only to the credited amount but also to the interest accrued on it.
II. The Government is not required to deposit any money other than what is collected as fines from the employer.
Which one is correct?- AIBE - 2025
- Labour & Industrial Law
- Consider the following statements about Article 32 of the Constitution and select the correct answer:
I. The Article is silent about the locus standi regarding who may approach the Court.
II. The Article is silent about the opposite party against whom relief may be granted.
III. The Article creates scope for even a sixth type of writ.- AIBE - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
- If a bailiff executes an eviction based on a civil court order later declared void for lack of jurisdiction, what protection does Section 78 of the Indian Penal Code provide?
- AIBE - 2025
- Indian Penal Code (IPC)
- Under Section 290(1) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, within how many days from the date of framing of charge can an accused file an application for plea bargaining?
- AIBE - 2025
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)
- According to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, what is the fixed amount of compensation payable in the event of death caused by a motor vehicle accident under no-fault liability?
- AIBE - 2025
- General Law
View More Questions