Discussion

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

By,Jannatul Ferdous Annisa, monday,20 November 2023,11:59pm

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

PIL means "public Interest litigation" which is a part of writ but have some difference.PIL only apply for a group of people or whole country but writ can be apply for recovery the violated fundamental rights of any person.PLI Can filed by anyone related to the matter of affected but Writ can only be submitted  by relatives or legal representatives.

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

     
writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

  
writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

PIL means "public Interest litigation" which is a part of writ but have some difference.PIL only apply for a group of people or whole country but writ can be apply for recovery the violated fundamental rights of any person.PLI Can filed by anyone related to the matter of affected but Writ can only be submitted  by relatives or legal representatives.

IPL means "public Interest litigation" which is a part of writ but have some difference.PIL only apply for a group of people or whole country but writ can be apply for recovery the violated fundamental rights of any person.PLI Can filed by anyone related to the matter of affected but Writ can only be submitted  by relatives or legal representatives.

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

IPL means "public Interest litigation" which is a part of writ but have some difference.PIL only apply for a group of people or whole country but writ can be apply for recovery the violated fundamental rights of any person.PLI Can filed by anyone related to the matter of affected but Writ can only be submitted  by relatives or legal representatives.

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

A "writ" and "PIL" (Public Interest Litigation) are related legal concepts, but they are distinct in their scope and purpose. Let's explore the differences between the two:

1. **Writ:**

   - **Definition:** A writ is a formal written order issued by a court or other legal authority commanding the performance of a specific act or the cessation of a particular action.

   - **Purpose:** Writs are generally issued to protect individual rights, enforce the rule of law, or correct legal wrongs. They are often invoked by individuals to seek remedies when their rights are violated.

   - **Types:** Writs can take various forms, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, each serving a specific legal purpose.

2. **Public Interest Litigation (PIL):**

   - **Definition:** PIL is a legal action initiated in a court by an individual or organization seeking to address issues that affect the public interest, rather than private interests.

   - **Purpose:** PIL is brought to the court not for personal grievances but for issues that have broader societal implications. It allows citizens to directly approach the judiciary to seek redress for public welfare concerns.

   - **Scope:** While a writ can be a tool used within PIL, PIL itself encompasses a broader range of legal actions aimed at addressing systemic issues, social injustices, or matters affecting the public at large.

**Key Differences:**

- **Scope:** Writs are specific legal orders issued for the protection of individual rights, while PIL addresses broader public interest concerns.

- **Initiation:** Writs are typically initiated by individuals seeking remedies for personal rights violations, while PIL can be initiated by any concerned citizen or organization acting on behalf of the public interest.

- **Purpose:** The primary purpose of a writ is to protect individual rights or correct legal wrongs, whereas PIL is geared toward addressing larger societal issues and ensuring the protection of public welfare.

In summary, while a writ is a specific type of legal order, PIL is a broader concept involving legal actions initiated for the benefit of the public interest rather than individual grievances.

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed and a PIL which is filled by a person in the interest of the public at large. 

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed and a PIL which is filled by a person in the interest of the public at large. 

A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed and a PIL which is filled by a person in the interest of the public at large. 

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILS is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are: Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are: Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism.

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

Writ Jurisdiction is the instrument for enforcement of fundamental rights. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme Court or the High Courts directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation, however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The Supreme Court of India, pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man. As a part of my academic activities, I’ve completed this assignment on writ jurisdictions and Public Interest Litigation

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism

1.A writ is a formal, legal document that orders a person to cease performing a specific action or deed. & a PIL which is filed by a person in the interest of the public at large.

2.Writs were developed over time as a way for authorities legal. & The chief objective behind PILs is ensuring justice to all & promoting the welfare of the people.

3.Writ is a very powerful weapon available to a citizen. & Public Interest Litigation is grounded just around art-102 of the Constitution.

4.There are 5types of writ. There are : Habeas corpus, Mandamus, Writ of prohibition, Quo warranto & Certiorari.

& There are two types of PIL. There are : Representative Social Action & Citizen Social Action.

5. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. & Public Interest Litigation is the power given to the public by courts through judicial activism.

Writ Jurisdiction is the instrument for enforcement of fundamental rights. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme Court or the High Courts directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation, however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The Supreme Court of India, pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man. As a part of my academic activities, I’ve completed this assignment on writ jurisdictions and Public Interest Litigation

Writ Jurisdiction is the instrument for enforcement of fundamental rights. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme Court or the High Courts directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation, however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The Supreme Court of India, pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man. As a part of my academic activities, I’ve completed this assignment on writ jurisdictions and Public Interest Litigation

Writ Jurisdiction is the instrument for enforcement of fundamental rights. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme Court or the High Courts directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation, however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The Supreme Court of India, pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man. As a part of my academic activities, I’ve completed this assignment on writ jurisdictions and Public Interest Litigation

Writ jurisdiction is the instrument for enforcement of fundamental rights. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal.

Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque

vs.

Bangladesh and others

Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1995

17 BLD (AD) 1997, Vol. XVII, Page-1 to 33; 1 BLC (AD) (1996) Page- 189 to 219 (1996)

A.T.M. AFZAL, CJ.-

The liberalized view as expounded by my brother is an update, if I may say so, of the liberalization agenda which was undertaken in the case of Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman, 26 DLR (SC) 44. It is a matter of some pride that quite early in out Constitutional Journey the question of locus standi was given a liberal contour in that decision by this Court at a time when the Blackburn cases were just being decided in England which established the principle of "sufficient interest" for a standing and the doctrine of public interest litigation or class action was yet to take roots in the Indian Jurisdiction. The springboard for the liberalization move was the momentous statement made in that case: "It appears to us that case was found to be a person aggrieved not because he brought any personal grievance before the Court but because, to quote from the judgment itself, "we heard him in view of the constitutional issue of grave importance raised in the instant case involving an international treaty affecting the territory of Bangladesh and his complaint as to an impending threat to his certain fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution, namely, to move freely throughout the territory of Bangladesh, to reside and settle in any place therein as well as his right of franchise. Evidently, these rights attached to a citizen are not local. They pervade and extend to every inch of the territory of Bangladesh stretching up to the continental shelf."

Two principles were established in that case, -(1) that when there is a threat to a fundamental right of the citizens any one of them can invoke the jurisdiction under article 102 of the Constitution, that any citizen from any part of the country may become a petitioner and (2) that if a constitutional issue of grave importance is raised (in that case it was an international treaty affecting territory of Bangladesh) a petitioner qualifies himself to be a person aggrieved.

The liberal interpretation given to the expression "any person aggrieved" in the judgments of my learned brothers, in my opinion, approximates the test of or if the same is capsulized, amounts to, what is broadly called, "sufficient interest". Any person other than an officious intervenor or a wayfarer without any interest or concern beyond what belongs to any of the 120 million people of the country or a person with an oblique motive, having sufficient interest in the matter in dispute is qualified to be a person aggrieved and can maintain an action for judicial redress of public injury arising from breach of public duty or for violation of some provision of the Constitution or the law and seek enforcement of such Public duty and observance of such constitutional or legal provision. Now what is `sufficient interest` will essentially depend on the co-relation between the matter brought before the Court and the person who is bringing it. It is not possible to lay down any strait-jacket formula for determining sufficient interest which may be applicable in all cases. Of necessity the question has to be decided in the facts of each case as already pointed out in the case of Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman. This topic has been eloquently summed up by the Indian Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Gupta and others, AIR 1982 SC 149 and I fully subscribe to that statement. It reads:

"What is sufficient interest to give standing to a member of the public would have to be determined by the Court in each individual case. It is not possible for the court to lay down any hard and fast rule or any strait-jacket formula for the purpose of defining or delimiting `sufficient interest`. It has necessarily to be left to the discretion of the Court. The reason is that in a modern complex society which is seeking to bring about transformation of its social and economic structure and trying to reach social justice to the vulnerable section of the people by creating new social, collective `diffuse` rights and interests imposing new public duties on the State and other public authorities infinite number of situations are bound to arise which cannot be imprisoned in a rigid mould or a Procrustean formula. The Judge who has the correct social perspective and who is on the same wavelength as the Constitution will be able to decide, without any difficulty and in consonance with the constitutional objectives, whether a member of the public moving the Court in a particular case has sufficient interest to initiate the action."

A person pleading sufficient interest may be able to cross, what is called, the threshold stage on the averments made in the writ petition but it will always remain open for a prospective respondent to contest the said claim on facts and also to assail the bonafides or even the appropriateness in a particular case of the petitioner for seeking a relief invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court Division under article 102 of the Constitution. ... but the consideration would have been different if any organization representing a weaker section of the society has come to complain about a breach of any fundamental right of its members or any public wrong done to the members generally in breach of any provision of the constitution or law. The Court will have to decide in each case, particularly when objection is taken, not only the extent of sufficiency of interest but also the fitness of the person for invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under article 102 of the Constitution. Ordinarily, it is the affected party which is to come to the Court for remedy. The Court in considering the question of standing in a particular case, if the affected party is not before it, will enquire as to why the affected party is not coming before it and if it finds no satisfactory reason for non-appearance of the affected party, if may refuse to entertain the application.

Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque

vs.

Bangladesh and others

Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1995

17 BLD (AD) 1997, Vol. XVII, Page-1 to 33; 1 BLC (AD) (1996) Page- 189 to 219 (1996)

A.T.M. AFZAL, CJ.-

The liberalized view as expounded by my brother is an update, if I may say so, of the liberalization agenda which was undertaken in the case of Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman, 26 DLR (SC) 44. It is a matter of some pride that quite early in out Constitutional Journey the question of locus standi was given a liberal contour in that decision by this Court at a time when the Blackburn cases were just being decided in England which established the principle of "sufficient interest" for a standing and the doctrine of public interest litigation or class action was yet to take roots in the Indian Jurisdiction. The springboard for the liberalization move was the momentous statement made in that case: "It appears to us that case was found to be a person aggrieved not because he brought any personal grievance before the Court but because, to quote from the judgment itself, "we heard him in view of the constitutional issue of grave importance raised in the instant case involving an international treaty affecting the territory of Bangladesh and his complaint as to an impending threat to his certain fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution, namely, to move freely throughout the territory of Bangladesh, to reside and settle in any place therein as well as his right of franchise. Evidently, these rights attached to a citizen are not local. They pervade and extend to every inch of the territory of Bangladesh stretching up to the continental shelf."

Two principles were established in that case, -(1) that when there is a threat to a fundamental right of the citizens any one of them can invoke the jurisdiction under article 102 of the Constitution, that any citizen from any part of the country may become a petitioner and (2) that if a constitutional issue of grave importance is raised (in that case it was an international treaty affecting territory of Bangladesh) a petitioner qualifies himself to be a person aggrieved.

The liberal interpretation given to the expression "any person aggrieved" in the judgments of my learned brothers, in my opinion, approximates the test of or if the same is capsulized, amounts to, what is broadly called, "sufficient interest". Any person other than an officious intervenor or a wayfarer without any interest or concern beyond what belongs to any of the 120 million people of the country or a person with an oblique motive, having sufficient interest in the matter in dispute is qualified to be a person aggrieved and can maintain an action for judicial redress of public injury arising from breach of public duty or for violation of some provision of the Constitution or the law and seek enforcement of such Public duty and observance of such constitutional or legal provision. Now what is `sufficient interest` will essentially depend on the co-relation between the matter brought before the Court and the person who is bringing it. It is not possible to lay down any strait-jacket formula for determining sufficient interest which may be applicable in all cases. Of necessity the question has to be decided in the facts of each case as already pointed out in the case of Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman. This topic has been eloquently summed up by the Indian Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Gupta and others, AIR 1982 SC 149 and I fully subscribe to that statement. It reads:

"What is sufficient interest to give standing to a member of the public would have to be determined by the Court in each individual case. It is not possible for the court to lay down any hard and fast rule or any strait-jacket formula for the purpose of defining or delimiting `sufficient interest`. It has necessarily to be left to the discretion of the Court. The reason is that in a modern complex society which is seeking to bring about transformation of its social and economic structure and trying to reach social justice to the vulnerable section of the people by creating new social, collective `diffuse` rights and interests imposing new public duties on the State and other public authorities infinite number of situations are bound to arise which cannot be imprisoned in a rigid mould or a Procrustean formula. The Judge who has the correct social perspective and who is on the same wavelength as the Constitution will be able to decide, without any difficulty and in consonance with the constitutional objectives, whether a member of the public moving the Court in a particular case has sufficient interest to initiate the action."

A person pleading sufficient interest may be able to cross, what is called, the threshold stage on the averments made in the writ petition but it will always remain open for a prospective respondent to contest the said claim on facts and also to assail the bonafides or even the appropriateness in a particular case of the petitioner for seeking a relief invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court Division under article 102 of the Constitution. ... but the consideration would have been different if any organization representing a weaker section of the society has come to complain about a breach of any fundamental right of its members or any public wrong done to the members generally in breach of any provision of the constitution or law. The Court will have to decide in each case, particularly when objection is taken, not only the extent of sufficiency of interest but also the fitness of the person for invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under article 102 of the Constitution. Ordinarily, it is the affected party which is to come to the Court for remedy. The Court in considering the question of standing in a particular case, if the affected party is not before it, will enquire as to why the affected party is not coming before it and if it finds no satisfactory reason for non-appearance of the affected party, if may refuse to entertain the application.

As regards the locus standi of the appellant in the present case, I agree with my learned brothers that the High Court Division wrongly decided the issue upon wrongly relying on the Sangbad Patra Parishad case which has got no application to the facts of the present case. Facts of the appellant`s case have been elaborately noticed in the judgment of Mustafa Kamal, J. and I may state briefly that the appellant is the Secretary General of the Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA) and the said organisation is working in the field of environment and ecology. In the writ petition the activities of FAP, FAP-20 and the FPCO have been impugned on the ground, inter alia, that the said activities would adversely affect more than a million human lives and natural resources and the natural habitat of man and other flora and fauna and that they aroused wide attention for being allegedly anti- environment and anti-people project. The appellant stated in the writ petition that as an environmentally concerned and active organisation, BELA conducted investigations at various times in 1992-93 in the FAP-20 areas. The appellant alleged that no proper environmental impact assessment has been undertaken in relation to FAP projects even though the European parliament declared in its resolution of 24 June 1993 that there was urgent need of changing the FAP`s classification within the World the World Bank project scheme from category `B` to category `A` requiring full environmental assessment for projects which appear to have significant adverse effect on the environment.

A group of environmental lawyers possessed of pertinent, bonafide and well-recognized attributes and purposes in the area of environment and having a provable, sincere, dedicated and established status is asking for a judicial review of certain activities under a flood action plan undertaken with foreign assistance on the ground, inter alia, of alleged environmental degradation and ecological imbalance and violation of several laws in certain areas of the district of Tangail. The question is: does it have sufficient interest in the matter for a standing under article 102?

It is very interesting that Justice Douglas of the U.S. Supreme Court in his minority opinion went so far as to say in Sierra Club vs. Morton, 401 U.S. 907 (1971) (No.70-34) that contemporary public concern for protecting nature`s ecological equilibrium should lead to the conferral of standing upon environmental objects to sue for their own preservation. The learned Judge further said: Ecology reflects the land ethic; and Aldo Leopold wrote in A Sand County Almanac 204 (1949), "The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively, the land." That as I see it, is the issue of "standing" in the present case and controversy.

The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development containing 27 principles include, among other, it may be noted for the present purpose:

Principle 3: The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.

Principle 10: Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceeding, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.

Principle 10 above seems to be the theoretical foundation for all that have been vindicated in the writ petition and also provides a ground for standing. In this context of engaging cocern for the conservation of environment, irrespective of the locality where it is threatened, I am of the view that a national organization like the appellant, which claims to have studied and made research on the disputed project, can and should be attributed a threshold standing as having sufficient interest in the matter, and thereby regarded as a person aggrieved to maintain the writ petition subject to the objection or objections as may be raised by the respondents if a Rule is issued ultimately.

MUSTAFA KAMAL, J.: In Bangladesh an unnoticed but quiet revolution took place on the question of locus standi after the introduction of the Constitution of the People`s Republic of Bangladesh in 1972 in the case of Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman vs. Bangladesh, 26 DLR(SC) 44, decided on September 3, 1974 and hereinafter referred to as Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman`s Case. The appellant challenged the Delhi Treaty signed on the 16th May, 1974 by the Prime Ministers of the Government of Bangladesh and the Republic of India providing therein inter alia that India will retain the southern half of south Berubari Union No. 12 and the adjacent enclaves and in exchange Bangladesh will retain the Dahagram and Angarpota enclaves. The ground of challenge was that the agreement involved cession of Bangladesh territory and was entered into without lawful authority by the executive head of government. The High Court Division summarily dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellant had no locus standi. At the hearing of the certificated appeal before the Appellate Division it was urged by the appellant that since the remedies available under Article 102(2) of our Constitution are discretionary, the words "any person aggrieved" should be construed liberally and given a wide meaning, although in the facts and circumstances of a particular case the Court may regard the personal interest pleased by a petitioner as being slight or too remote. Reliance was placed by the appellant upon the case of Main Fazal Din vs. The Lahore Improvement Trust, 21DLR(SC)225 in which Hamoodur Rahman, C.J. had occasion to say that the right considered sufficient for maintaining a proceeding of this nature is not necessarily a right in the strict juristic sense but it is enough if the applicant discloses that he has a personal interest in the matter which involves loss of some personal benefit or advantage or the curtailment of a privilege or liberty of franchise. Upon considering several American and Indian decisions of the time and a lone Australian decision, the Appellate Division held as follows:

"It appears to us that the question of locus standi does not involve the Court`s jurisdiction to hear a person but of the competency of the person to claim a hearing, so that the question is one of discretion which the Court exercises upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of each case."

Locus standi was granted to the appellant even though he was not a resident of the southern half of South Berubari Union No.12 or adjacent enclaves involved in the Delhi Treaty because he had raised a constitutional issue of grave importance involving an international treaty affecting the territory of Bangladesh and posing an impending threat to his fundamental rights under Article 36 of the Constitution and his right of franchise. These rights, attached to a citizen, are not local. They pervade and extend to every inch of the territory of Bangladesh stretching up to the continental shelf.

This Court, therefore, settled seven general principles in Kazi Mukhlesur Rahman`s case, viz.-

(1) the High Court Division does not suffer from any lack of jurisdiction under Article 102 to hear a person.
(2) The High Court Division will grant locus standi to a person who agitates a question affecting a constitutional issue of grave importance, posing a threat to his fundamental rights which pervade and extend to the entire territory of Bangladesh.
(3) If a fundamental right is involved, the impugned matter need not affect a purely personal right of the applicant touching him alone. It is enough if he shares that right in common with others.
(4) In interpreting the words "any person aggrieved", consideration of "Fundamental Rights" in Part III of the Constitution is a relevant one.
(5) It is the competency of the person to claim a hearing which is at the heart of the interpretation of the words "any person aggrieved".
(6) It is a question of exercise of discretion by the High Court Division as the whether it will treat that person as a person aggrieved or no Court Division will exercise that jurisdiction upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of each case.

8 years thereafter we find an echo of some of the above principles in the Indian Supreme Court case of S.P. Gupta and others vs. President of India, AIR1982(SC)149, at paragraph 19A:

"What is sufficient interest to give standing to a member of the public would have to be determined by the Court in each individual case. It is not possimined[??][??] by the Court to lay down any hard fast rule or any strait-jacket formula for the purpose of defining or delimiting `sufficient interest`. It has necessarily to be left to the discretion of the Court. The reason is that in a modern complex society which is seeking to bring about transformation of its social and economic structure and trying to reach social justice to the vulnerable section of the people by creating new social, collective `diffuse` rights and interests imposing new public duties on the State and other public authorities infinite number of situations are bound to arise which cannot be imprisoned in a rigid mould or a Procrustean formula. The Judge who has the correct social perspective and who is on the same wave-length as the Constitution will be able to decide, without any difficulty and in consonance with the constitutional objectives, whether a member of the public moving the Court in a particular case has sufficient interest to initiate the action."

Coming now to our situation, the Sangbadpatra Parishad Case was no authority for the proposition that an environmental lawyers` association is not a person aggrieved when it espouses the causes of a large number of people on an environmental issue. The High Court division`s reliance on this decision was misplaced, to say the least, because the ratio decidendi of the said case was that an association of newspaper owners and news organisations, espousing not the causes of the downtrodden and the poor who have no access to justice, but the cause of its members who are opulent enough to seek redress on their own, cannot in a representative capacity be a person aggrieved, when the association`s own interest are not in issue. That case was not an authority even for the proposition that an association can never be a person aggrieved if it espouses the causes of its members in a representative capacity. The Sangbadpatra Parishad case was decided on the facts of that case and that is how should be read.

Writ Jurisdiction is the instrument for enforcement of fundamental rights. A writ is only permitted when the defendant has no other adequate remedy, such as an appeal. For the enforcement of fundamental rights one has to move the Supreme Court or the High Courts directly by invoking Writ Jurisdiction of these courts. But the high cost and complicated procedure involved in litigation, however, makes equal access to jurisdiction in mere slogan in respect of millions of destitute and underprivileged masses stricken by poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The Supreme Court of India, pioneered the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) thereby throwing upon the portals of courts to the common man. As a part of my academic activities, I’ve completed this assignment on writ jurisdictions and Public Interest Litigation