Back
High Court Of Calcutta
BHAGAWATI PRASAD BANERJEE
SAND CARRIERs OWNERS UNION - Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF CALCUTTA - Respondent
C. O. 3270 (W) Of 1988
Decided On : 04/21/1989
LOCUS STANDI - WRIT PETITION - ASSOCIATION - MAINTAINABILITY - PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION - REPRESENTATIVE ACTION - STANDING REQUIREMENTS - LEGAL PERSONALITY - INDIVIDUAL STANDING - STATUTORY STANDING - UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS - PERSON AGGRIEVED - ACADEMIC DISCUSSION - PRELIMINARY OBJECTION - DOCK PERMIT FEES - CALCUTTA PORT TRUST.
Fact of the Case:
Three associations representing lorry and trailer operators in the Calcutta Port filed a writ petition challenging the Calcutta Port Trust's notification increasing dock permit fees from Rs. 20.40 to Rs. 1,000 per annum per vehicle. The petitioners claimed to represent the interests of their members and sought to enforce their common grievance through the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the writ petition was not maintainable at the instance of the associations as they lacked locus standi or standing to file the petition. The court found that the associations were unincorporated and, therefore, not legal persons capable of exercising rights or having duties. The court also held that the associations did not have individual standing as they were not directly affected by the impugned notification. Further, the court held that the associations could not maintain the petition as a public interest litigation or in a representative character as they had not been conferred any rights under any law and did not represent a socially or economically disadvantaged class.
Issues: 1. Whether the associations had locus standi or standing to file the writ petition. 2. Whether the writ petition was maintainable as a public interest litigation or in a representative character. 3. Whether the associations were person aggrieved by the impugned notification.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Locus standi or standing is a fundamental requirement for maintaining a writ petition. Only a person aggrieved by an action or inaction of a state or authority under Article 12 of the Constitution can move a writ petition. 2. Public interest litigation can be maintained by a public-spirited individual espousing the cause of a large number of people who are suffering under some legal wrong or injury and are unable to approach the court for relief due to poverty, helplessness, disability, or social or economic disadvantage. 3. Representative action or class action can be initiated by any member of a class affected by an order or action or inaction on the part of the government or authorities. However, the representative must obtain leave from the court, and the members of the class are bound by the decision taken in the case.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the associations lacked locus standi or standing to file the petition. The court held that the associations were not person aggrieved by the impugned notification and could not maintain the petition as a public interest litigation or in a representative character. The court also held that the petition was not maintainable for the purpose of academic discussion.
( 1 ) THIS writ application was filed by three different Associations on behalf of its members against the notification No. 443 published in the Calcutta Gazette in its Extraordinary issue by Calcutta Port Trust on 10th Mar. 1988 whereby the dock permit fees was enhanced from Rs. 20. 40 to Rupees 1, 000/- per annum per vehicle. The petitioners claimed to be the associations of the operators of the lorries and trailors operating in Calcutta Port. In this writ application, a preliminary objection was raised as to the maintainability of the writ application at the instance of the petitioners inasmuch as, the petitioners are societies who had filed writ application for the benefit of all its members.
( 2 ) WITH regard to the preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the writ application raised by the Respondents Mr. Arun Prokash Sircar learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the writ petition was moved by the Sand Carrier's Owners' Union represented by Jata Sankar Tewari General Secretary, Kidderpore Lorry Owners' Association represented by Raj Kishore Singh and Strand Road Lorry Owners' Association represented by Md. Idris, General Secretary of the said Association. It is stated that Kidderpore Lorry Owners' Association is not a registered body. It was submitted by Mr. Sircar that the concept of rights of individual vis-a-vis rights of the association as a collective body has undergone a sea change and in this connection, reliance was placed to the observation made by Justice Krishna Iyer in the case of Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh (Railway) v. Union of India reported in (1981) 1 SCC 246 at para 62 (of SCC) : (para 63 of AIR ). "a technical point is taken in the counter-affidavit that petitioner 1 is an unrecognised association and therefore, the petitioner to that extent, is not sustainable. It has to be overruled. Whether the petitioners belong to a recognised union or not, the fact remains that a large body of persons with a common grievance exists and they have approached this court under Art. 32. Our current processual jurisprudence is not of individualistic Anglo-Indian mound. It is broad based and people oriented, and envisions access to justice through `class action' "public interest litigation and representative proceedings". Indeed, little Indians in large numbers seeking remedies in courts through collective proceedings, instead of being driven to an expensive plurality of litigations, is an affirmation of participative justice in our democracy. We have no hesitation in holding that the narrow concept of `cause of action' and `person aggrieved' and individual litigation is becoming obsolescent in some jurisdictions. It must fairly be stated that the learned Attorney General has taken no objection to a non recognised association maintaining the writ petitions. "it was further submitted that by the impugned action on the Calcutta Port Trust, all members of the petitioners Association have been affected and as such the said Association could represent its members in a representative bodies to ventilate their common grievance in a proceeding under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. It was further submitted that in the case of Howrah Wholesale Fish Traders' Association which was a society registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act. It was submitted that the right to form association is guaranteed in Art. 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India.
( 3 ) IT was further submitted that S. 19 of the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961, provides that every society may sue or may be sued in the name of the President, Secretary or any office bearer authorised by the governing body in this behalf.
( 4 ) MR. Moni Bhusan Sirkar learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents contended that it is firmly established principles that before a party moves writ application, he must have a legal right or a personal right. T
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
