A two-judge bench said the courts do not exceed their jurisdiction by hearing public interest litigations filed by NGOs and social activists on behalf of the poor and illiterate. Rather, by doing so, the courts fulfil a mandate laid down in the Constitution’s chapter on Directive Principles of State Policy.
“If the system can devote hours, days and months to hear the elitist class of eminent advocates engaged by those accused of evading payment of taxes… (or) heinous crimes… (then) some time can always be devoted for hearing the grievance of the vast majority of silent sufferers,” Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly observed on Tuesday.
“It will be a tragic and sad day when superior courts shut their doors (on) those, who, without any motive for personal gain… come forward to seek protection and enforcement of the constitutional rights of the poor, downtrodden and disadvantaged.”
The bench cited how the implementation of welfare laws remain “inadequate and tardy” and yet an outcry is raised whenever the courts try to get them enforced.
“A theoretical debate is started by raising the bogey of judicial activism or overreach and the orders issued for benefit of the weaker sections are invariably subjected to challenge in the higher courts.”
In many such cases, the bench noted, the sole object of these challenges is to tire out those who genuinely espouse the cause of the weak and poor.
On the present case, relating to the death of six sewerage workers in Delhi, the court said: “For the last few decades, a substantial segment of urban society has become insensitive to the plight of the downtrodden… (and) do not want to understand why a person is made to enter a manhole without safety gear and proper equipment. They look the other way when the body of a worker who dies in a manhole is taken out.”
This increases the courts’ “constitutional obligation” to hear these cases.
“It is the duty of the judicial constituent of the state, like its political and executive constituents, to protect the rights of every citizen,” the court said.
“The superior courts will be failing in their constitutional duty if they decline to entertain petitions filed by genuine social groups, NGOs and social workers (on behalf of deprived sections).”
The top court was dealing with the Delhi Jal Board’s appeal against a Delhi High Court order of August 2008 asking it to supply protective gear to sewerage workers and ensure their health and welfare.
The National Campaign for Dignity and Rights of Sewerage and Allied Workers had sought compensation from the Jal Board for the families of the six workers who had died in 2009 after inhaling toxic fumes without protective gear.