ABSTRACT
Social and economic justice is at the heart of the Constitution of India. It places a duty on the judiciary to protect the rights of citizens so that each might live a life of dignity and well-being.1 However, the human and geographical scale of India is gargantuan as are its internal issues, specifically population growth, poverty, illiteracy and corruption (see Introduction). Nevertheless, India has undergone immense transformation as a result of its rapid economic growth. However, it remains a nation of stubborn paradoxes. ‘Shining India’ is reserved for the select few: the rich and the powerful. It is against this background of systemic inequality that the senior Indian judiciary assumes seminal importance. The tripartite checks and balances of the relationship between Parliament, the executive and the judiciary, so beloved in western common law constitutionalism and bequeathed to independent India in 1947, continue to experience limited success. The ineffectiveness of both political leadership and administrative authorities to discharge their constitutional roles and statutory duties, coupled with widespread public sector inefficiency and corruption, has cast the Indian judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, as protector of the interests of the disadvantaged in matters of public concern. Social and economic inequality affects millions of people and for these reasons the judiciary has adopted the proactive role of providing redress through the innovative process commonly called ‘public interest litigation’ (PIL) or ‘social action litigation’ (Baxi 1985).2
