AIR 1982 SUPREME COURT 149 ::1982 RajLR 389 ::1981 SCC (Supp) 87

Supreme Court Of India

Hon'ble Judge(s): P. N. Bhagwati, A. C. Gupta, S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, V. D. Tulzapurkar, D. A. Desai, R. S. Pathak, E. S. Venkataramiah , JJJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.32, Art.226, Art.217— Locus Standi - Traditional rule - History and development - Principles applicable in determining locus standi - Public interest litigation - Petition by practising lawyers raising important questions relating to independence of judiciary - Maintainable Pt. Conceded. (There is a general agreement with the views expressed by Bhagwati and Tulzapurkar, JJ. on the question of locus standi of the practising lawyers to challenge validity of transfer of a Judges, refusal to re-appoint an Additional Judge and Law Minister's circular letter.- Ed.) Per Bhagwati: J. (Gupta, Fazal Ali, Desai, Pathak, Venkataramiah JJ. concurring):- The traditional rule in regard to locus standi is that judicial redress is available only to a person who has suffered a legal injury by reason of violation of his legal right or legally protected interest by the impugned action of the State or a public authority or any other person or who is likely to suffer a legal injury by reason of threatened violation of his legal right or legally protected interest by any such action. The basic of entitlement to judicial redress is personal injury to property, body, mind or reputation arising from violation, actual or threatened, of the legal right or legally protected interest of the person seeking such r....