Concept of Locus Standi

Locus Standi: Meaning and Essential ingredients of Locus Standi

By |

In our judicial system, any party who suffers some damage or injury from the act of a private individual or of the state can approach the court. In this process, it is essential to demonstrate that the person approaching the court must have suffered some injury or his legal right has been violated. In other words, there shall be a sufficient nexus between the injury caused and the person approaching the court. This doctrine is known as “Locus Standi“ and it ensures that only the bonafide parties came to the court. However, in recent times,  the rule of locus standi has been relaxed and even allowed a public-spirited citizen to approach the court on behalf of poor and downtrodden people.

Meaning of Locus Standi

The Latin Maxim “Locus Standi” consists of two words namely “locus” which means place and “standi” means the right to bring an action. So, collectively, it means the right to appear or the right to bring an action before the court. As per this maxim, one person needs to show his legal capacity before approaching the court. It means the person can only approach the court when his personal interest is suffered or an injury is inflicted upon him. This maxim is one of the fundamental principles of the adversarial litigation system.

In India, the concept of locus standi is mentioned under Order 7 Rule 11 of the civil procedure code, 1908. For instituting any action, the plaintiff or the appellant must prove his locus standi first and the trial will start thereafter. The court can dismiss the entire case, irrespective of its merit if the requirement of locus standi is not fulfilled.

Illustration – In a commercial transaction between A and B, A acted fraudulently and due to which B suffered whopping damage of 100 crore. Now, only A has the locus standi to approach the court as his legal right is violated.

Types of Locus Standi

Locus standi, meaning “the right to stand” in court, determines whether a person or entity has the legal capacity to bring a lawsuit. Courts do not entertain cases unless the claimant has a direct or sufficient interest in the matter. Over time, legal systems have expanded the concept of locus standi to allow not just directly affected individuals, but also representatives and public interest groups, to seek justice.

The different types of locus standi can be broadly classified into the following categories:

Individual Locus Standi (Personal Interest Standing)

Definition:
This is the most traditional form of locus standi. A person or entity has individual locus standi if they can prove they have personally suffered harm, loss, or a violation of legal rights due to an action, law, or decision.

Key Requirements:

  • The claimant must have a direct connection to the dispute.
  • The legal injury must be real and not hypothetical.
  • The court must be able to provide a remedy or relief to the affected party.

Examples of Individual Locus Standi:

  • A tenant sues their landlord for wrongful eviction.
  • A worker challenges unpaid wages from an employer.
  • A business sues a government agency for unfair regulatory treatment.

Case Law Example:

  • Kelsen v. Imperial Tobacco Co. (1957) – A landlord successfully sued a company for trespassing when an advertising sign extended into his property. The court ruled he had direct standing because his rights were affected.

Significance:
This form of locus standi ensures that only those with a genuine interest in a case can bring lawsuits, preventing courts from being overwhelmed with cases filed by unrelated parties.

Representative Locus Standi (Third-Party or Associational Standing)

Definition:
Representative locus standi allows a third party to file a lawsuit on behalf of another person or group who may not be in a position to represent themselves. This commonly applies to cases where:

  • A group has similar legal interests, and one member represents them.
  • The affected individuals are unable to represent themselves (e.g., children, mentally disabled persons).
  • An association or union represents its members in legal disputes.

Key Requirements:

  • The representative must have a genuine connection to the affected parties.
  • The people being represented must have a legal interest in the case.
  • The representation must be authorized or in the best interest of the affected group.

Examples of Representative Locus Standi:

  • A labor union sues an employer for unfair treatment of workers.
  • A consumer rights group sues a company for misleading advertisements.
  • A guardian files a lawsuit on behalf of a minor child.

Case Law Example:

  • NAACP v. Alabama (1958) – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NAACP had the right to challenge state laws on behalf of its members, setting a precedent for representative standing in civil rights cases.

Significance:
This type of locus standi ensures that disadvantaged or underrepresented groups can still access justice, even if they cannot file cases themselves.

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) or Social Action Locus Standi

Definition:
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a modern extension of locus standi that allows any individual or organization to file a lawsuit on behalf of the public when there is a significant issue affecting society at large. Unlike individual or representative standing, PIL does not require the claimant to have a personal legal injury.

Key Requirements:

  • The issue must affect a large section of society.
  • The petitioner must have genuine public interest in the matter.
  • The court must be satisfied that the case is not frivolous or politically motivated.

Examples of Public Interest Locus Standi:

  • A human rights lawyer files a case against police brutality.
  • An environmental activist challenges illegal deforestation in court.
  • A journalist petitions the government to disclose public health records.

Case Law Example:

  • S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981, India) – The Supreme Court of India expanded PIL by allowing any concerned citizen to file a case if it served the public good, especially in matters of corruption, environment, and human rights.

Significance:
PIL ensures that socially and economically weaker sections of society receive justice. It holds governments and corporations accountable and promotes judicial activism in governance.

Statutory Locus Standi (Legal Standing Created by Law)

Definition:
Some laws explicitly grant standing to certain individuals, groups, or agencies to file lawsuits on specific issues. This is known as statutory locus standi, where the law itself defines who has the right to sue.

Key Requirements:

  • The claimant must meet the eligibility criteria set by the statute.
  • The lawsuit must fall within the scope of the law’s provisions.
  • The case must be filed within the time limits specified by the statute.

Examples of Statutory Locus Standi:

  • A government agency sues a polluter under environmental protection laws.
  • A whistleblower files a case under an anti-corruption law.
  • A tax authority sues a business for non-payment of taxes.

Case Law Example:

Significance:
Statutory locus standi ensures that laws are enforced effectively by allowing government agencies and authorized parties to file lawsuits without requiring personal harm.

Citizen Standing (Actio Popularis or Open Standing)

Definition:
This is a broader version of PIL, where any citizen can challenge government actions without needing a direct connection to the case. Some legal systems allow citizens to file lawsuits simply in the interest of the rule of law, even if they are not personally affected.

Key Requirements:

  • The issue must involve constitutional or legal violations.
  • The claimant must prove that the case is for the greater good.
  • There should be no political motivation or abuse of legal process.

Examples of Citizen Standing:

  • A voter challenges electoral fraud in a general election.
  • A taxpayer sues the government for misuse of public funds.
  • A constitutional lawyer files a case against laws violating human rights.

Case Law Example:

  • Costa v. ENEL (1964, European Court of Justice) – A citizen challenged Italy’s laws for violating European Union treaties, showing how individuals can hold governments accountable in international law.

Significance:
This type of standing empowers ordinary citizens to protect democracy, constitutional rights, and good governance.

Essential ingredients of Locus Standi

As per order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil procedure code, 1908, there are certain ingredients that a party must follow. These ingredients are as follows –

Locus standi, a Latin term meaning “the right to stand”, refers to the legal capacity of a person or entity to bring a case before a court. It determines whether a party has a sufficient stake or legal interest in a matter to justify judicial intervention. Without locus standi, a court may dismiss a case on procedural grounds without addressing its merits.

For a person or entity to have locus standi, certain essential ingredients must be met. These ingredients vary across legal systems but generally include the following:

Direct Interest in the Subject Matter

A party must show a real and direct connection to the issue being litigated. Courts typically do not entertain cases where the claimant has no personal or legal interest in the matter. The direct interest can be:

  • Personal – The party is directly affected by the law, decision, or action in question.
  • Financial – The party suffers economic loss due to the challenged act.
  • Legal – The party’s rights or obligations under the law are being infringed.

For example, a homeowner challenging a government order to demolish their house has a direct personal and legal interest in the case.

Sufficient Cause of Action

A petitioner must establish that there is a valid legal issue that requires judicial intervention. Courts do not entertain cases that are:

  • Hypothetical or abstract – The issue must involve an actual legal dispute, not a theoretical concern.
  • Frivolous or vexatious – The case must not be brought merely to harass or inconvenience another party.
  • Already resolved – If the matter has been previously settled, courts may dismiss the case.

For example, a citizen cannot challenge a tax law simply because they dislike it unless they can show how it directly harms them.

Suffering of Legal Injury or Adverse Impact

A claimant must prove that they have suffered or are at imminent risk of suffering a legal wrong or injury. This can include:

  • Violation of fundamental rights (e.g., denial of freedom of speech).
  • Loss of property or financial damage due to government action.
  • Negative environmental impact affecting the claimant’s health or livelihood.

For instance, a company losing its business license unfairly can argue that it has suffered a legal injury justifying its right to sue.

Absence of an Alternative Remedy

Courts may refuse to hear a case if the petitioner has other legal remedies available. For example:

  • If an administrative tribunal exists to handle a dispute, courts may require the petitioner to approach that tribunal first.
  • If an appeal process is available, courts may ask the party to exhaust that option before filing a lawsuit.

However, if no alternative remedy is effective or available, the petitioner may establish locus standi to approach the court directly.

Standing in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) or Representative Cases

In some cases, courts allow individuals who are not directly affected to file cases for the greater public good. This is common in Public Interest Litigation (PIL), where:

  • Social activists or NGOs file cases on behalf of underprivileged groups.
  • Environmental groups challenge policies that harm public health.
  • Consumer organizations sue companies for misleading advertisements.

For example, a lawyer filing a case to protect forest land from illegal deforestation may have locus standi even if they are not personally affected.

Jurisdiction and Competency of the Court

Even if a party meets all other requirements, the case must be filed in the correct court with jurisdiction over the matter. Courts will dismiss cases if:

  • The dispute falls outside their authority (e.g., filing a tax dispute in a criminal court).
  • The claim is filed in the wrong territorial jurisdiction (e.g., challenging a Delhi government order in a Mumbai court).

Ensuring the case is brought before the appropriate judicial body is crucial for maintaining locus standi.

The exception to the rule of Locus Standi-Public Interest Litigation:

From the period of independence, there is an alarming rise in the poverty and unemployment rate. A lot of people didn’t have the necessary resources to approach the court. They were grossly exploited by others and their legal rights were deeply prejudiced. The cost of litigation was very high and the people due to money and illiteracy were not approaching the court. So, to remove the hardship of law, a new concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) came into existence. It was the result of the efforts of judicial activism in a direction to achieve justice in a true sense.

Public Interest Litigation

The literal meaning of “Public Interest Litigation” itself is the litigation in the interest of the public at large. The hon’ble supreme court in the case of Janata Dal v. Chaudhary, 1992 defined the term  ‘Public Interest Litigation’. As per the court, PIL means a legal action brought in the court of law on behalf of those persons whose legal rights are violated and they can’t approach the court due to their economic or socially disadvantageous position.

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is litigation that can be filed by any member of the public In which the public interest is a subject. Litigation is filed To redress the wrong or injury to the public. The person can file the PIL in any matter where the interest of the public at large is affected by pollution, terrorism, road safety or hazardous construction etc. It is a powerful weapon against the work which are violating the Human Rights or fundamental rights of the citizen of India. The reason behind the PIL is to protect the people of India. The public interest litigation can consider as the fundamental right given under the constitution of India to the citizen of India to protect their rights.

The meaning of Public Interest Litigation is protecting the public interest by filing litigation in court. It is the use of law to protect the rights of the public. PIL provides the right to equality to the citizen of India. The PIL is can be filed by a person or a group of persons from the side of the public to show the wrong or injury happening to the public due to private or government matters.

History of Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Firstly, the concept of public interest litigation originated in the United States of America. They were using PIL in the mid-1980s. After some time, many other countries started using this concept in their county. The PIL was adopted in India in 1986.

Who can file the public interest litigation (PIL)?

The PIL can be filed by:

  • A person: a sole person can file the PIL against any public or private work in which the public is being harassed or the work is affecting the public interest.
  • A group of persons: The PIL Can be filed by a group of persons against public or private work which is harming the public interest.
  • The court: The court itself can take action to provide remedies to aggrieved persons who are suffering due to some government work.

It should keep in mind that:

  • PIL can only be filed in cases related to the public interest.
  • A person cannot file Public Interest Litigation for his personal injury or loss.
  • Moreover, the person who is finding the PIL must not have any interest in the litigation.

Parties against whom the PIL can be filed

The PIL can be filed by a person against the State government, central government and municipal authority. The PIL cannot be filed against the private person alone. If a person wants to file the PIL against the private person or private work like the work of a company, factory of a partnership firm, the person has to add state government and local authorities as parties with that private person.

Let us take the example, a private factory polluting air and water in Delhi which causing harm to the public. Now, if a person wants to file PIL against that factory, he will add the State government of Delhi and pollution control board of Delhi as party including the factory as a party in the litigation.

Where I can file the public interest litigation?

Any person who is a citizen of India can file the PIL:

In the Supreme Court of India

Article 32 of the Constitution of India provides the remedy to the person to file the PIL as a writ petition to the Supreme Court of India.

In the High Court

Article 226 of the Constitution of India provide the remedy to the person or a group of persons to file Public Interest Litigation or writ petitions in the High Court.

In the court of Magistrate

The person can file the PIL in the court of magistrate by taking the help of section 133 of the criminal procedure code.

These are the various Courts in India that have the capacity to take the PIL into consideration and pass the necessary orders to solve the problem related to the public interest.

How to file public interest litigation (PIL)?

There are some steps to take by a person to file the PIL which are:

  • Approach a lawyer or organization to file the case related to PIL. The person can file the case alone or in a group. There is no need for any such lawyer to file the PIL.
  • Collect all the oral and documentary evidence related to the problem which is causing harm to the public interest.
  • Names and addresses of the aggrieved party who is filing the petition in the court
  • Names and addresses of the parties against whom the case is being filed
  • Any important dates like in date of eviction or date of injunction stop the work. The date of the notice of eviction.
  • At the end of the application, the prayer or relief is sought from the court of law.
  • After filing the PIL against the parties, the person must have sent the copy of the PIL to every defendant party (in case of High court)

Characteristics of public interest litigation in India

PIL can be filed even by sending a postal letter to the court. The court has the authority to consider this letter as Public Interest Litigation. These are some following characteristics of public interest litigation:

  • Any person or group of people can file the PIL
  • The postal later can also be considered as PIL by the court
  • The court has the authority to accept the PIL without any Court fees
  • It can be filed against the State government or even against any private person who is violating the rights of the public.

Benefits of the public interest litigation

There are various benefits of the PIL that is provided to the citizen of India.  the following benefits are:

  • It aware the public about their rights
  • It provides many different and new rights of the citizen which has been seen in recent years
  • Any person can file the PIL without Locus Standi
  • These types of litigations bind the executive and courts to do their work properly
  • PIL is the biggest and important step against corruption in India.
  • The court may appoint the commission in special cases of PIL in which the commission will check the details related to PIL.

These are some important benefits of PIL in India.

In this public interest litigation, the strict rule of Locus Standi is relaxed and a broad rule is adopted to meet the requirement of changing times. It is not essential that a person must have suffered some injury before instituting a suit. Now, a public-spirited person can bring a suit on behalf of any person whose rights have been affected. There is no need to have a direct relationship with the person who suffered the injury. However, another important prerequisite for instituting PIL is that the person must be acting in a bona fide manner. There shouldn’t be any personal gain, private profit or some political motivation behind it.

Landmark Cases of Public Interest Litigation

Mumbai Kamgar Sabha v. Abdul

The seeds of the first PIL originated in this case wherein Hon’ble Justice Iyyer allowed a writ petition under article 32 relating to the inhumane condition of labourers. It was filed by a labour association that doesn’t have a direct relationship with the concerned labour. However, the court allowed the petition and issued necessary directions.

Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, 1979

It was the first official case of Public Interest Litigation and it focussed on the adverse condition of under trial prisoners. An advocate approached the court based on a news column published on Indian Express highlighting the severe condition of prisoners. The court allowed this appeal and a whopping 40,000 prisoners were released from jail due to that PIL. The court construed the right to speedy justice as a fundamental right of a prisoner. This case laid the foundation of Public Interest Litigation in India.

MC Mehta vs Union of India

This is one of the landmark cases in the history of environmental jurisprudence in India. The concept of absolute liability was also derived from this case. In this case, a writ petition was filed by a social activist lawyer named M.C Mehta reporting the manufacturing of hazardous substances in a residential place. Justice P.N Bhagwati adjudicated the writ and pronounced a historical verdict by holding the industry absolutely liable for his conduct and it was not entitled to use any exceptions.

Vishakha vs the State of Rajasthan

In this case, an NGO approached the court against the sexual harassment of female employees at the workplace. The court in its historic verdict issued a large set of guidelines relating to the safety of women at the workplace. In 2013, these guidelines were codified through the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

Procedure to File a Public Interest Litigation

As per various judicial precedents, any citizen of India can approach the court on behalf of the public interest by filing a petition under the following heads –

Grounds for rejecting a PIL

There are no specified grounds on which a  PIL can be rejected. However, our apex court has laid down certain criteria for a PIL not admissible in the court of law. These grounds are hereinbelow provided –

Res Judicata

The principle of Res Judicata is enshrined under section 11 of the Civil procedure code 1908. This principle states that a party to a suit is not entitled to go for another suit if a petition is already pending in another court of law. For applying this principle, the nature and the content of both the suit must be the same. This principle is the cornerstone of both the civil and criminal judicial system. Thus, any PIL that raises an issue, which is already under consideration of a competent judicial authority, can not be allowed to proceed as per the aforesaid principles.

Water Pollution- Causes and Prevention of water pollution

Misrepresentation or Suppression of Facts

It is well-settled law that one should approach the court with clean hands. It means he should disclose all the necessary facts and shall act honestly. If he indulged in false or fraudulent practices involving the suppression of facts, then the court can reject the PIL straight away. In K Welcome Hotel v. State of Andhra Pradesh: A PIL is filed and the petitioners have not shown its complete turnover in the pleadings and later on, the court came to know about it. The court rejected the appeal.

Infructuous Petition

The term infructuous means that there is no legal authority left on the matter. It is generally said when the course of action required in the PIL ceases to exist. In the case of Mohit v. District Magistrate, a petition was filed under Article 32 to issue the writ of habeas corpus. However, the person was released during the pendency of the proceedings. Now, the petition became infructuous.

Not Impleading the Necessary Parties

In public interest litigation, it is very important to plead with the necessary parties in the case. In a landmark case of Krishna Swamy v. Union of India, the writ petition was related to the removal of a sitting Supreme Court Judge from his office, but the Hon’ble Judge was not made a party to it. The petition was therefore dismissed on this sole ground.

Other Exceptions of the rule of Locus Standi

Apart from Public Interest Litigation, there are some other exceptions also to the maxim of locus standi. These exceptions are as follows –

Clear exceptions

Some exceptions are very well settled due to their nature and scope. For example, In the writ of habeas corpus, a person’s near relative approaches the court as the detained person can’t avail the remedy. Even, in the case of murder or other offences in which the person lost his life, the rule of locus standi is relaxed and his family member or other person lodges the complainant to seek justice. A minor is also generally represented by his father or guardian in a suit.

Furthermore, the concept of the class action is also recognised in India wherein a single represents the interest of a particular class that suffered some damages. Lastly, in case of nuisance or any wrongful act, a suit for injunction or declaration can be filed by the advocate general with the court’s prior permission or by 2 or more persons which may not directly be affected by the impugned nuisance. It is recognised under Section 268 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Constitutionality of legislation

It has also been observed that sometimes the rule of locus standi is relaxed when the constitutionality of legislation comes into question. In India, the legality of any statute can be challenged in a court of law without showing the direct harm inflicted by the statute.

Statutory Remedies

There are instances wherein a statute include a provision that relaxed the strict requirement of locus standi. This provision is incorporated by putting the phrase like person aggrieved or aggrieved person.  However, if any dispute arises, then the court interprets the phrase as per the facts and background. The words ‘person aggrieved’ indicate a wider scope and it not only includes the person who actually suffered the loss but also the person who is apprehensive of the future loss.

Conclusion

The maxim of locus Standi is one of the core principles of civil law and it is enshrined under Rule 7 Order 11 of the Civil procedure code, 1908. It states that only the person who suffered some injury can approach the court. However, this rule was proving to be a hindrance as some people were not approaching the court due to their financial or social condition. Thus, the hon’ble supreme court relaxed this maxim and started a new concept called PIL wherein any public citizen can approach the court for the betterment of society at large.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top