The procedures adopted by the Court in cases of public interest litigation

Supreme Court of India
Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union Of India & Others on 16 December, 1983
Equivalent citations: 1984 AIR 802, 1984 SCR (2) 67
Author: P Bhagwati
Bench: Bhagwati, P.N.
           PETITIONER:
BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA

    Vs.

RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT16/12/1983

BENCH:
BHAGWATI, P.N.
BENCH:
BHAGWATI, P.N.
PATHAK, R.S.
SEN, AMARENDRA NATH (J)

PER PATHAK, J CONCURRING
    
4;2. The  procedures adopted  by the  Court in cases of
public interest     litigation must  of  course  be  procedures
designed and  shaped by     the Court  with a view to resolving
the problem  presented before  it on  determining the nature
and  extent  of     relief     accessible  in     the  circumstances.
Whatever the  procedure adopted     by the     court    it  must  be
procedure known     to judicial  tenets and characteristic of a
judicial  proceeding.  There  are  methods  and     avenues  of
procuring material  available to  executive and     legislative
agencies and  often employed  by them  for the efficient and
effective discharge  of the tasks before them. Not all those
methods and  avenues are  available to    the Court. the Court
must ever  remind itself that one of the indicia identifying
it as  a Court    is the nature and character of the procedure
adopted by  it in  determining a  controversy. It is in that
sense limited  in the  evolution of procedures pursued by it
in the    process of  an adjudication,  and in  the grant     and
execution of  the relief.  Legal jurisprudence    has  in     its
historical
83
development identified    certain fundamental principles which
form the  essential constituents of judicial procedure. They
are employed  in every    judicial proceeding,  and constitute
the basic  infrastructure along     whose    chamacts  flows     the
power of  the Court  in the process of adjudication. [159 H;
160 A-D]
     4:3. What    should be  the    conceivable  frame  work  of
procedure in  public interest litigation does not admit of a
clear cut  answer. It  is not possible to envisage a defined
pattern of  procedure applicable  to all cases. Of necessity
the pattern  which the    Court  adopts  will  vary  with     the
circumstances of  each case.  But, if  there  is  a  statute
prescribing a  judicial procedure  governing the  particular
case the Court must follow such procedure. It is not open to
the Court  to bypass  the statute  and    evolve    a  different
procedure at variance with it. Where, however, the procedure
prescribed by statute is incomplete or insufficient, it will
be open     to the     Court to  supplement it by evolving its own
rules. Nonetheless, the supplementary procedure must conform
at all    stages to  the principles  of natural justice. There
can be    no deviation  from the principles of natural justice
and other well accepted procedural norms characteristic of a
judicial proceeding.  They  constitute    an  entire  code  of
general     principles  of     procedure,  tried  and     proven     and
hallowed by the sanctity of common and consistent acceptance
during long  years of the historical development of the law.
The general  principles of  law, to which  reference is made
here, command  the confidence,    not merely  of the judge and
the lawyer  and the  parties to     the litigation,  but supply
that  basic   credible    to  the     judicial  proceeding  which
strengthens public  faith in the Rule of Law. They are rules
rooted    in   reason  and   fairplay  and   their  governance
guarantees a  just disposition of the case. The Court should
be wary     of suggestions     favouring novel procedures in cases
where accepted    procedural rules will suffice. [160 E-H; 161
A]