International Journal of Empirical Research Methods

ISSN NO : 2995-6110

The International Journal of Empirical Research Methods is dedicated to promoting and advancing empirical research methodologies across various disciplines. This journal aims to provide a platform for researchers, scholars, educators, and practitioners to share insights, methodologies, and findings that contribute to the improvement of empirical research practices and the enhancement of evidence-based decision-making.

Submit Your Article Editorial Board
  • 522
    Views
  • 0
    CrossRef citations to date

Public Interest Litigation For The Protection Of Vulnerable Segment Of The Society And The Achievement Of Social Justice For Them: Bangladesh Perspective

1 Assistant Professor, Department Of Law, International Islamic University Chittagong Chattogram 4318,Bangladesh

Volume 2

Issue 1

Page: [8 - 23]

Published Online: April 1, 2024

Download Full Article ()
Creative Commons

  • Abstract

    • The Phrase ‘Public Interest Litigation’, Commonly Known As PIL, Is A Relatively Recent Phenomenon In Our Judicial System. PIL Refers To Situations In Which Concerned People Or Groups Approach The Court In Good Faith For The Benefit Of The General Public. How Indigent And Helpless People Can Get Help In Court Through PIL And At The Same Time To Ensure That No One Is Deprived Of Justice Irrespective Of His Lack Of Qualifications, Ability And Financial Conditions Is The Main Focus Of This Article. It Is A Method For Bringing Societal Anomalies To The Notice Of The Court In Order To Obtain Effective Remedies For The Most Vulnerable Sections Of The Society. Attempts Have Been Made In This Paper To Investigate The Factors That May Give Rise To Public Interest Litigation. It Has Also Been Tried To Develop A Comprehensive Idea For Understanding The Fact That Public Interest Litigation Is Necessary To Guarantee Equal Justice For All And Prevent The Infringement Of Human Rights.

    Keywords: Aggrieved Person Locus Standi Violation Of Rights Vulnerable Section Of The Society Implementation.

  • Figures

    Figure Image

  • References

      • [1]A Downs, (1962) “Public interest: Its meaning in democracy” in Vol. 29 Social Research, pp. 5-36.
      • [2]Abu Bakar Siddique v. Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed and others 1 BLC (1996) 483
      • [3]Ahmed Syed Ishtiaq (1993) “An expanding frontier of judicial review - public interest litigation” in Vol. 45 DLR Journal, pp. 36-45 at 39
      • [4]Ahmed Syed Ishtiaq (1996) “The rule of standing - some reflections” in The National Workshop on Public Interest Litigation: Sharing Experiences and Initiatives, a workshop organized by Ain O Salish Kendra, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and Madaripur Legal Aid in Dhaka on 26-17th July at 7.
      • [5]Anwar Hossain Khan v. Speaker of Bangladesh Sangsad Bhavan and others 47 DLR (1985) 42
      • [6]Baburam Verma v. Uttar Pradesh (1971) 2 Serb, LR 674
      • [7]BALCO Employees Union vs. Union of India, (AIR 2001 SC Weekly 5135)
      • [8]Bangladesh Retired Government Employees Welfare Association v. Bangladesh 46 DLR (1994) 426
      • [9]Bangladesh Sanghadpatra Parishad (BSP) v. The Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others 43 DLR (1991) 424
      • [10]Bearman’s Ltd v. Metropolitan Police District Receiver (1961) 1 All ER 384 at 391 and 393
      • [11]Dada Match Workers Union v. Government of Bangladesh (1977) 29 DLR (HCD) 188
      • [12]DC Jain (1986) 'The phantom of “public interest' in AIR Journal, pp. 85-89
      • [13]Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v. Bangladesh 17 BLD (AD) (1997) 1 at 14.
      • [14]Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v. Bangladesh, 17 BLD (AD) (1997)
      • [15]Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque v. Bangladesh 17 BLD (AD) (1997) 1
      • [16]Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque vs. Government of Bangladesh, WP 998 of 1994, CA 24 of 1995 (1996.07.25) (Flood Action Plan Case)
      • [17]DS Nakara and others. v. Union of India, (AIR 1983 SC 130
      • [18]ETV Ltd. v. Dr. Chowdhury Mahmood Hasan [(2002) 54 DLR (AD) 130]
      • [19]F Raymond Marks, Kirk Leswing and Barbara A Fortin sky (1972) The Lawyer, the Public, and Professional Responsibility, Chicago, American Bar Foundation at 51
      • [20]Frank Shipping Ltd. V. Bangladesh 50 DLR (AD) (1998) 140.)
      • [21]Gurushiddappa v. Gurushiddappa, AIR 1937 Bom 238 at 241
      • [22]Hasan v. Masoor AIR 1948 PC 68 at 70 https://doi.org/10.3406/ roma.1948.3645
      • [32]Islam M Amir-ul (1996) “Person Aggrieved: PIL and Bangladesh on the threshold” in The National Workshop on Public Interest Litigation: Sharing Experiences and Initiatives, a workshop organized by Ain O Salish Kendra, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and Madaripur Legal Aid in Dhaka on 26-27th July at 8.)
      • [24]Islam Mahmudul (1995) Constitutional law of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh Institute of law and international affairs at 511.
      • [24]Jesingbhai v. Emperor AIR 1950 Bom 363 (FB). https://doi.org/10.1515/ juru.1950.1950.12.363
      • [26]Jobon Nahar and other v. Bangladesh and others 49 DLR (1997) 108
      • [27]John Rawls (1971) A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Harvard University Press https://doi. org/10.4159/9780674042605
      • [28]Kazi Moklesur Rahman v. Bangladesh, 26 DLR (AD) 44
      • [29]Latifur Rahman J. commented in Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v. Bangladesh, 17 BLD (AD) (1997) at 25.
      • [30]Law and Arbitration Center v Government of Bangladesh, 19 BLD (HCD) (1999) 489
      • [31]Manzil Morshed (2021) “Interested groups desperate to dispute Public Interest Litigations” an interview organized by Dhaka Times 24. Com, on 02 July 2021.
      • [32]Md. Idrisur Rahman vs. Shahid Uddin Ahmed and others 51 DLR (1999) (AD) 162.
      • [33]Mustafa Kamal J. commented in Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v. Bangladesh, 17 BLD (AD) (1997) at 25.
      • [34]Narayanan v. Kurichithanam AIR 1959 Ker 379
      • [35]People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Ministry of Home Affairs (AIR 1985 Delhi 268 at 290
      • [36]Qazi Shafi Uddin J. commented in Anwar Hossain Khan v. Speaker of Bangladesh Sangsad Bhavan and others 47 DLR (1985) 42
      • [37]R v. Inland Revenue Commissioners (IRC), Ex parte National Federation of Self- Employed and Small Businesses Limited [1982] AC 617
      • [38]Saiful Islam Dilder v. Bangladesh 50 DLR (1998) 318 and 321
      • [39]Sangeeta Ahuja (1997) People, Law and Justice: Casebook on Public Interest Litigation, Vols 1 and 2, London, Sangam Books, pp. 860-861.
      • [40]Sara Hossain, S Malik and Bushra Musa, (1997). Public interest litigation in South Asia: Rights in search of remedies, Dhaka. University Press Limited, pp. 103-122.
      • [41]SP Gupta and others v. Union of India and others AIR 1982 SC 149
      • [42]State of Bihar v. Kameshwar C.A.I.R. 1952 SC 252
      • [43]State v. Deputy Commissioner, Satkhira and others 45 DLR (1993) 643
      • [44]Syed Borhan Kabir vs Secretary Ministry of Health, 1993, Writ Petition No. 701/1993
      • [45]Tatem Steam Navigation Co. v. Inland Revenue Commissioners (1941) 2 KB 194
      • [46]The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. (Act no. v of 1908)
      • [47]The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
      • [48]Union of Democratic Rights v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1473 at 1477

  • Article Metrics

    Views

    522

  • Copyright and Permissions

    At Guinness Press, authors retain the copyright for all articles published in our journals. These articles are licensed under the open-access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, granting free access for reading and download. Additionally, the original published version must be appropriately cited when reusing or quoting the article. These terms ensure widespread accessibility while ensuring proper attribution to the authors.

    All content published by Guinness Press is safeguarded by international copyright and intellectual property regulations. We kindly request that you honor these protections when utilizing our materials.

    For further information, please contact us at info@guinnesspress.org.