What is Locus Standi?

The term "locus" (plural loci) is derived from Latin, meaning "place." "Locus standi," also in Latin, translates to 'a place to stand' in law, referring to the right to bring an action. It represents a party's ability to establish a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action being challenged, supporting their participation in the case. The concept of locus standi has ancient origins, emerging with the establishment of judicial administration. Its core meanings include the right to be heard, the right to move the court for the enforcement of one's legal rights, and the right to private defense. Ensuring that no one is unheard aligns with the principle of natural justice, emphasizing the provision of proper opportunities for all parties involved in court proceedings.

 

Legal Precedents: In the case of Fateh Singh vs State of Rajasthan (AIR 1995), the Rajasthan High Court affirmed that every person possesses a fundamental right to be heard. Similarly, in Sarita Kumari vs Board of Education Ajmer (AIR 2011), the court held that while the principle of natural justice requires providing an opportunity for hearing to every person, in cases of group cheating in exams, this principle may not be applicable.

 

Significance of Locus Standi: The significance of locus standi is rooted in the maxim 'ubi jus ibi remedium,' which means where there is a right, there is a remedy. In constitutional law, every individual has the right to approach the court, constituting a fundamental right known as locus standi.

 

Evolution of the Doctrine: In ancient customary law, only the affected party could seek justice for the violation of their fundamental rights. Before the 1980s, the concept of locus standi was limited to the aggrieved party, excluding non-affected individuals from initiating legal actions on behalf of the victim. This resulted in a disconnect between the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws made by the legislature, particularly affecting the vast majority of illiterate citizens.

 

Liberal View and Contemporary Changes: Over time, the traditional theory has evolved to ensure that no one is deprived of justice. The shift towards a more liberal view acknowledges the importance of justice for all, irrespective of financial means. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) allows public-spirited individuals or organizations to file suits on behalf of those who cannot afford legal representation, aligning with the constitutional mandate in Article 39A.

 

Supreme Court's Perspective: The Supreme Court, in People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India AIR 1982 SC 1473, emphasized the departure from the traditional rule of standing. The Court expanded the doctrine of locus standi, breaking away from the confines inherited from the Anglo-Saxon System of jurisprudence. This evolution has revolutionized the concept of access to justice, ensuring that it is easily available to the disadvantaged and marginalized. The judgment mentioned, “The traditional rule of standing which confines access to the judicial process only to those to whom legal injury is caused or legal wrong is done has now been jettisoned by this Court and the narrow confines within which the rule of standing was imprisoned for long years as a result of inheritance of the AngloSaxon System of jurisprudence have been broken and a new dimension has been given to the doctrine of locus standi which has revolutionised the whole concept of access to justice in a way not known before to the western system of jurisprudence... it is therefore necessary to evolve a new strategy by relaxing this traditional rule of standing in order that justice may become easily available to the lowly and the lost.”

 

In conclusion, the doctrine of locus standi has undergone transformative changes, embracing a broader perspective that aligns with the principles of justice, equity, and access for all.