LexENVIRONMENT AND CONSUMER PROTECTION FOUNDATION versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2017] 9 S.C.R. 453 ENVIRONMENT AND CONSUMER PROTECTION A FOUNDATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS . . (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 659 of2007) 8 ,. AUGUST 11,2017 (MADAN B. LOKUR AND DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.) Women Welfare/Development - Writ petition for rehabilitation of widows living in Vrindavan - On the basis of an article bringing C out pathetic and shocking conditions of the widows living in Vrindavan - Petition seeking directions to Union of India and the State of Uttar Pradesh to take steps to rehabilitate the widows so that they can live with dignity -'- Pursuant to orders passed by Supreme Court from time to time, various reports filed by concerned authorities like National Commission for Women. the Ministry of D Women and Child Development and the State of Uttar Pradesh - Held: Committee directed to be constituted by Supreme Court to study all the reports filed and provide with a common working plan based on the suggestions in the reports - Committee also requested to consider the issue of widow remarriage - Constitution of India - E Art. 21 - Public Interest Litigation (PJL) - Social Justice - Socially underprivileged groups - Widows living in Vrindavan. Public Interest Litigation ..;.. Advpntageri of- Discussed.· Issuing directions; the Court HELD: 1.1 There can be little or no doubt at all that widows in some parts of the country are socially deprived and to an extent ostracized. Perhaps this is the reason why many ofthem choose F to come to Vriitdavan and other ashrams where, unfortunately, they are iiot treated with the dignity they deserve. This is evident from the article thal caused this public interest litigation and the G compilation of reports that this litigation has generated. It is to give voice to these hapless widows that it became necessary for this Court to intervene as a part of its constitutional duty and for reasons of social justice to issue appropriate directions. [Para 18)(475-B-C) H 453 454 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 9 S.C.R. A 1.2 The effort put in by all concerned in the reports should not go waste - it must be gainfully utilized, being in a sense a gold mine of pragmatic and workable suggestions. Accordingly, a Committee is constituted to study all the reports filed in this Court and provide with a common working plan (based on the 8 suggestions in the reports~ within a period of two months and in any case on or before 30 November, 2017. [Para 11](472-E-FJ 1.3 One of the issues adverted to during the hearing of the petitions, but not mentioned in any of the reports, was the need to encourage widow remarriage. This is a subject of hope that C might enable our society to give up the stereotype view of widows. The Committee is requested to consider this during its deliberations. [Para 12](473-BJ 2.1 The advantage of public interest litigation is not only to empower the economically weaker sections of society but also to o empower those suffering from social disabilities that may not necessarily be of their making. The widows of Vrindavan (and indeed in other ashrams) quite clearly fall in this category of a socially disadvantaged class of our society. [Para 15](474-A-BJ 2.2 The first phase of public interest litigation concernes E itself primarily with the protection of the fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of "the marginalized groups and sections of the society who because of extreme poverty, illiteracy and ignorance cannot approach this Court or the High Courts." To this is added- the socially underprivileged groups. These are the people who have no real access to justice and in that sense F are voiceless, and these arc the people who need to be empowered and whose cause needs to be championed by those who advocate social justice for the disadvantaged. [Para 16](474-C-I>J G H State of Uttarancha/ v. Ba/want Singh Chau/al (2010) 3 SCC 402 : [2010) 1 SCR 678; People'.\· Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India ( 1982) 3 SCC 235 : (1983) l SCR 456 and Delhi Jal Board v. National Campaign for Dignity & Rights of Sewerage & Allied Workers (2011) 8 SCC 568: (2011) 12 SCR 34 - relied on. ENVIRONMENT AND CONSUMER PROTECTION FOUNDATION v. UNION OF INDIA · Case Law Reference [1983] 1 SCR 456 relied on Para 14 [2010] 1 SCR 678 relied on Para 16 [2011) 12 SCR 34 relied on Para 17 CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 659of2007. Under Article 32 of the Constitution
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.