National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Background
Voluntary organisations working for the rights of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes filed this writ petition alleging widespread non-implementation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and its rules, including failure to appoint special officers, nodal officers, and protection cells, and failure to properly register and investigate complaints of police negligence. Relying on National Human Rights Commission reports and other material, the petitioners sought a mandamus directing effective implementation of the Act across the country.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court found, on examining the record, a genuine and continuing failure by the authorities to comply with the Act and Rules, despite the Act's laudable protective purpose. While acknowledging that State Governments bear primary responsibility for implementation, the Court held the Central Government also has an important supervisory role, including placing an annual report before Parliament under Section 21(4) of the Act. The Court directed the Central and State Governments to strictly enforce the Act, directed the National Commissions to perform their protective duties, and requested the National Legal Services Authority to formulate schemes for legal awareness and free legal aid for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, following the approach taken in Safai Karamchari Andolan v. Union of India (2014) for a similar statute. The petitioners were left at liberty to approach the appropriate authorities and High Courts for specific grievances, and the writ petition was disposed of with no costs.
Lesson Learnt
Courts can use PIL to hold governments accountable for actually implementing protective welfare legislation, not just leaving the law on the books, but once general directions for enforcement are issued, individual victims are generally still expected to pursue their specific complaints before the appropriate authorities or High Courts rather than through the Supreme Court directly.