PIL

As far as I know, it is not possible. A public interest petition should be filed by the applicant. The court cannot convert suo motu into PIL.  An interesting question, sreenath. I am also curious to know the correct answer from the learned people.

Dear Sreenath

In appropriate cases, if the issue involves the interest of public at large, the high court as well as supreme court have converted writ petitions to PILs. 

Best regards.,

Just few months before I heard that Supreme Court itself has converted a writ as  PIL.

It is an appropriate treat.

In the present scenario when none is shouldering their responsibility the sou moto action can always be done and very necessary and should be appreciated by any responsible person.   

Thanks Krishna Sir and Ram Sir.  :)

I do not accept your "SELFISH THANKS" Ms. Suchitra...

You only expect that I should reply your postings and smartly throws a "THANKS' towards me and goes away>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Why you do not shoulder responsibiliy to reactt on my postings hoooooo ??????????????

SINCE YOU HAVE ALL CONCERNS WITH YOURSELF.

You have to understand there is no obligation for me to respond to all of the postings of every member here, Ram sir. Let me humbly reply you that I have never kept silent when I feel I could respond to a specific query.

This query is from a student like me and I felt to say what I thought correct. I would not do the same for a query which requires expertise to answer, me being a student and specially when I am not sure of the answer.

YOU ARE AN EQUAL CITIZEN.. But I am really sorry. i do not know that you will take it so seriously.  I forgot that you have no such obligation.  Please forget it what I did.

1. Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity V State of Bengal AIR 1996 SC2426.

2. Mohanlal Sharma V State Of Uttar Prasesh AIR 189 2 SCC 609

Mohanlal Sharma V state of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1989 2 SCC 609...Sorry for the typin mistake 

what is lower court? are you taking about high court?

hc & sc has the power to do this, ( to attend a PIL).

sorry sir..i meant that hc and sc

thnx for all answers

According to Art.21 of our beloved constitution the right to life is gauranteed by established procedures and the state have the responsibility to save that life.Also i know that there is a precedence expounding that the right to die is not an integral part of this right to life.

My question is that the "thing" gauranteed under Art.21 is a right. i can exersice or deny that; that is my fundamental right. Then if there is a right for me to live i can discard that. Suppose if iam fed up with my life then if i want to end my life it must be my right to be an integral part of Art.21

.Even if i cant discard the right to life then, it implys that it is my right to do whatever with my life because it is the right gauranteed for me. so it is the conclusion that Right to die is an integral part of right to life and the apex court have committed a mistake in its judgement oppossing this argument.