Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks to identify which of the given cases is a case of "public interest." This refers to cases that are either filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) or deal with substantial questions of law affecting the public at large.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
Let's analyze the cases:
- (A) Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): This was a landmark PIL that dealt with the issue of sexual harassment of women at the workplace. The Supreme Court, in the absence of any specific legislation, laid down the "Vishaka Guidelines," which were binding until Parliament enacted the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. This is a classic example of a public interest case.
- (B) Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): In this case, the Supreme Court struck down clauses of the 42nd Amendment Act and reinforced the Basic Structure Doctrine. It dealt with the fundamental balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles and the scope of Parliament's amending power. This case involved huge public interest as it concerned the fundamental nature of the Constitution.
- (C) Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardichand (1980): This case is a landmark in environmental law and judicial activism. Residents of a locality sued the municipality for not providing proper sanitation and drainage, causing a public nuisance. The Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of public nuisance and compelled the municipality to perform its statutory duties. This was a crucial case for public health and environmental justice, clearly a matter of public interest.
Since all three cases dealt with issues of significant public importance and had a wide-ranging impact on the rights of citizens and the law of the land, all of them are cases of public interest.
Step 4: Final Answer:
All the listed cases (Vishaka, Minerva Mills, and Municipal Council, Ratlam) are cases of public interest.