WWW.LIVELAW.

IN

1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

EXTRA-ORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ___________ OF 2020 (PIL)

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

IN THE MATTER OF:

DR. SUBHASH VIJAYRAN (ADVOCATE)

…PETITIONER
VERSUS

1. UNION OF INDIA,
Through its Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice,
R.No. 405-A, A Wing, 4th Floor,
Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi- 110001
Ph: 011 – 23384617, 23387553; E-mail: gn.raju@nic.in

2. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA,

Through its Chairman,
21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area,
Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi- 110002
E-mail: info@barcouncilofindia.org, manankumarmishra@gmail.com
Ph: 011- 49225000, FAX: 011-49225011

3. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA,

Through its Secretary General, Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110002
Ph: 011-23388922-24, 23388942; FAX: 011-23381508, 23381584
E-mail: supremecourt@nic.in

… RESPONDENTS
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS VIOLATED:

ARTICLES 14 & 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

To

Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and his Associate Justices of

The Supreme Court of India. The Writ Petition of the Petitioner
above-named MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. This is a Writ Petition [PIL] under Article 32 r/w Articles 14, 21

& 39A of the Constitution of India, praying for writs/ orders/
directions facilitating Access to Justice by the common man by
use of Plain Language and by placing page limit on pleadings
and time limit on oral arguments before this Hon'ble Court.

2. Antecedents of the Petitioner & Statements/ Declarations:

B. I am filing this petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India as Public Interest Litigation in the
interest of general public and have no personal interest in
the same.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

3
C. I am filing this petition on my own and not at the instance
of someone else. The litigation costs including travelling
expenses are being borne by me.

D. I have not filed a similar matter seeking the same relief

before this court or any other court of law.

E. I give my consent for the matter to be taken up through

video-conferencing mode. I shall prefer to link to the
Hon’ble Bench by video-conferencing through my own
desktop/ laptop/ mobile phone. In case of any technical
glitch in Video-Conferencing, I consent for
teleconferencing by WhatsApp Audio or Video call on
any of my numbers i.e.

3. FACTS CONSTITUTING THE CAUSE OF ACTION:

A. The writing of most Lawyers is: (1) wordy, (2) unclear,

(3) pompous and (4) dull. We use eight words to say what
can be said in two. We use arcane phrases to express
commonplace ideas. Seeking to be precise, we become
redundant. Seeking to be cautious, we become verbose.
Our writing is teemed with legal jargon & legalese. And
the story goes on.

B. For whom are the Constitution, Law and Legal System

for? For the lawyers? Or the judges? Or – most
important, but often neglected – The Common Man.

C. Yet, it is the common man who is most ignorant of the

system – in fact quite wary of it. Why? Because he
neither understands the system nor the laws. Everything
is so much complicated and confusing. The way laws are
enacted, practiced and administered in our country
violates the fundamental rights of the masses by denying
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

4
them – Access to Justice. ‘Speedy Justice’ and ‘Legal
Awareness’ are the two, out of the many, facets of Access
to Justice.

SIMPLIFY THINGS – USe PLaIN LaNGUaGe

D. The Legislature & Executive: The legislature should

enact precise and unambiguous laws, and as far as
possible, in plain language. A guide in Plain English and
in vernacular of the laws of general public interest should
be issued by the Government – explaining the law and its
application – in easy to understand language. Further, all
rules, regulations, notifications, communications etc.,
drafted and issued by all branches of the Government –
that are of general public interest – should be in Plain
Language. Here, I will like to appreciate the good work
that the Department of Justice is already doing in
spreading legal literacy among the masses.

E. The Bar Council of India: The Bar Council of India

should introduce a mandatory subject of “Legal Writing
in Plain English” in the 3 year and 5 year LL.B. courses
– where law students are taught to draft precise and
concise legal documents in Plain English – so as to
enable our legal manpower in providing Access to Justice
to the masses.

F. The Supreme Court of India: It is time the standard of

pleadings filed in the Supreme Court is mandated to be of
the highest quality. Lawyers need to put in extra efforts to
make their pleadings clear, crisp, concise & accurate. A
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

5
page limit for pleadings and time limit for oral arguments
should be imposed. Too much of precious time, energy
and resources of both the Court as well as lawyers/
litigants are wasted due to badly written & verbose drafts
and ad-nauseam oral arguments.

G. Speech of Hon’ble Minister of Law and Justice on

“Making India: Role of Empowering Citizens with Legal
Awareness” delivered at Kochi, on 15.01.2016 is
annexed as Annexure: P-1 (pages 15 to 19).

H. On 04.06.2020, I sent a representation to the

Respondents. Its copy is annexed as Annexure: P-2
(pages 20 to 23).

I. An article from Plain English Campaign, titled,

“Drafting in Plain English” is annexed as Annexure:
P-3 (pages 24 to 28).

J. Article titled, “The Plain English Movement” is

annexed as Annexure: P-4 (pages 29 to 33).

4. Source of information:

A. (1) My personal experience as an Indian Lawyer (2)

Going through online resources on various legal systems
(3) You Tube videos, on-line news items (4) Website of
this Hon'ble Court.

B. I have personally verified the information by cross-

checking the information on the websites of respective
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

6
courts and also cross-verified by the information from
multiple independent sources.

5. Details of remedies exhausted: I have sent a representation

dated 04.06.2020, via e-mail to the Respondents. The nature of
issues in this PIL is such that they would require directions by
this court. As such there are no statutory and/or other remedies
left to be availed.

6. Nature and extent of injury caused or likely to be caused to

the public: The common man is ignorant and wary of our legal
system. His fundamental rights are infringed by its
complications and delayed delivery of justice.

7. Nature and extent of personal interest, if any, of the

petitioners: I have no personal interest except than to uphold
the rule of law.

8. Details regarding any civil, criminal or revenue litigation,

involving the petitioner or any of the petitioners, which has
or could have a legal nexus with the issue(s) involved in the
Public Interest Litigation: No such litigation, past or present.

9. Whether issue was raised earlier; if so, what result:

A. I declare that the issues raised in this petition were neither

dealt with nor decided by a Court of law either at my
instance or, to the best of my knowledge, at the instance
of any other person.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

7
B. I declare that in no P.I.L., any cost has been ever been
awarded to or imposed upon me, and no appreciation or
stricture has ever been passed for/against me.

10.Whether concerned Government Authority was moved for

relief(s) sought in the petition and if so, with what result: I
have sent a representation dated 04.06.2020, via e-mail to the
Respondents over the issues raised in this petition. The nature of
issues in this petition is such that they would require directions
by this court. I declare that I have availed all statutory and other
remedies. No reply has been received as of date from the
respondents.

11.GROUNDS:

A. As held in catena of judgments of this Hon'ble Court,

Access to Justice is a fundamental right being a facet of
Article 14 read with Article 21 & 39A of the Constitution
of India. ‘Speedy Justice’ and ‘Legal Literacy/
Awareness’ are facets of Access to Justice.

[Refer Judgment dated 19.07.2016 in Transfer Petition (C) No.

1343 of 2008 (5 Judges Constitution Bench) in Anita Khushwa v.
Pushpa Sadan for detailed discussion on Access to Justice as
fundamental right and compilation of Case Laws on the subject].

B. For the population to access justice, they must understand

their rights and the means for claiming them. For most
people, the laws and the formal justice system are alien
institutions they fear or do not understand. Legal
awareness helps counter this misunderstanding and
promote Access to Justice. Messages should be in plain
language for easy understanding of the citizens.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

8
C. Access to Justice: United Nations & the Rule of Law:
“In strengthening access to justice, the UN system works
with national partners to develop national strategic plans
and programmes for justice reform and service delivery.
UN entities support Member States in strengthening
justice in areas including: monitoring and evaluation;
empowering the poor and marginalized to seek response
and remedies for injustice; improving legal protection,
legal awareness, and legal aid; civil society and
parliamentary oversight; addressing challenges in the
justice sector such as police brutality, inhumane prison
conditions, lengthy pre-trial detention, and impunity for
perpetrators of sexual and gender-based violence and
other serious conflict-related crimes; and strengthening
linkages between formal and informal structures.”

https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/thematic-areas/access-to-justice-
and-rule-of-law-institutions/access-to-justice/

D. Practice Note dated 09.03.2004: United Nations

Development Programme (UNDP): “Legal awareness
is the foundation for fighting injustice. The poor and
other disadvantaged people cannot seek remedies for
injustice when they do not know what their rights and
entitlements are under the law. Information on remedies
for injustice must be intelligible to the public and
knowledge provided to them must serve their practical
purposes.”

https://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publi
cations/democratic-governance/dg-publications-for-
website/access-to-justice-practice-note/Justice_PN_En.pdf
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

9
E. Because of the complicated nature of our legal system,
there is a vast disparity between the haves and haves not
vis-à-vis Access to Justice. The fortunate few are able to
wrestle their way through the matrix of our legal system
and get an early hearing – (where they even argue for
hours and days on end) – while the majority has to wait
for decades for their matter to be finally heard and
decided by courts of law.

F. Plain language is designed to ensure that the reader

understands it as quickly, easily, and completely as
possible. It avoids verbose, convoluted language and
jargon. Using plain language in communications
ultimately improves efficiency, because there is less
ambiguity for the readers, and less time is taken for
clarifications and explanations. This is a step toward
Access to Justice.

G. Using plain Language does not mean writing everything

in the style of a tabloid newspaper. It means writing
documents in a way that is appropriate for the audience.
If a law affects people, those people should have a chance
of understanding it. The language used in a law should
depend on who the law affects; taking account of how
familiar they are with the subject.

H. In many countries, laws mandate that public agencies use

plain language to increase access to programs and
services. The ‘United Nations Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities’ includes plain language as
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

10
one of the "modes, means and formats of
communication".

I. Though not all laws are of interest to the general public,

yet there are statutory areas that are of intense interest to
the people. Examples include criminal law, and laws
relating to family, divorce, property, inheritance,
employment, civil rights, landlord-tenant relations,
consumer protection etc. Surely, ordinary citizens ought
to be able to understand the rights conferred and
obligations imposed by such statutes for meaningful
Access to Justice.

J. It is a trite law – “ignorance of law is no excuse”. But if

we don’t express these laws of general public interest in
plain and easy to understand language, how can we
expect ordinary citizens to obey them?

K. It is, thus, imperative that guidebooks/handbooks on the

laws of general public interest and mechanisms of
vindication of rights and redressal of grievances under the
law be issued by the Department of Justice both in Plain
English and in vernacular. On the same lines, all rules,
regulations, notifications, communications etc., drafted
and issued by all branches of Government – that are of
general interest to public – should be in Plain Language.

L. For adequate training of legal manpower, it is imperative

that the subject of “Legal Writing in Plain English” be
taught as a mandatory subject in 3 year and 5 year LL.B.
courses in Indian Law Schools. The trained law graduates
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

11
graduating from our law schools would, thus, help in
providing Access to Justice to the masses.

M. In this Hon'ble Court, where litigants wait for 5-10 years

for final hearing of their cases, we really don’t have the
luxury of hearing fancy, and many a times, irrelevant
arguments for hours and days on end. Too much of
precious time, energy and resources of both the Court as
well as lawyers/ litigants are wasted due to badly written
& verbose drafts and ad-nauseam oral arguments. We
have to prioritize and efficiently use our resources. If this
court is to be truly a court of the masses – and not court
of a fortunate few – the era of never-ending oral
arguments and verbose pleadings has to go.

N. It is time the standard of pleadings filed in this court is

mandated to be of the highest quality. Lawyers need to
put in extra efforts & multiple revisions to make their
pleadings clear, crisp, concise & accurate. This would
remove considerable burden off the judges, who
otherwise have to struggle their way through a jungle of
verbosity. A page limit for pleadings and time limit for
oral arguments should be imposed. Another step towards
Access to Justice.

O. As a humble suggestion vis-à-vis pleadings, a 50-60 page

limit for pleadings of the parties (excluding annexures/
exhibits etc.) and 20-30 page limit for replies to the
pleadings of opposite parties may be imposed. These
limits should only be relaxed in exceptional cases of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

12
constitutional or public importance, involving lengthy
arguments. Also permission should be granted to the
parties to highlight the relevant portions of their
annexures/ exhibits by coloured pens, for the convenience
of the court.

P. As a humble suggestion vis-à-vis oral arguments – for

each side – time limits of 5-10 minutes for applications,
20 minutes for short cases, 30 minutes for cases of
moderate length, and 40-60 minutes for long cases may
be imposed. Only in exceptional cases of constitutional
and public importance, should the time limit of oral
arguments be relaxed beyond one hour. These steps
would not only ensure speedy justice and reduce case
pendency in this Hon'ble Court, but also help the Court to
dispense quality justice.

12.Grounds for interim relief: No interim relief is prayed.

13.MAIN PRAYER: On the basis of the above premises, it is

most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court
may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any
other appropriate writ or order or direction as follows:

A. Direct Department of Justice to issue guides/handbooks

in Plain English and in vernacular – easily understandable
by layman – of Laws of general public interest –
explaining the law and procedure for vindication of rights
and redressal of grievances under the law.

B. Direct use of Plain Language – easily understandable by

the layman – in drafting and issuing of all government
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

13
rules, regulations, notifications, communications etc.,
which are of interest to the general public.

C. Direct Bar Council of India to introduce a mandatory

subject of “Legal Writing in Plain English” in 3 year and
5 year LL.B. courses in all Law Schools in India and,

D. Direct imposition of page limit for pleadings and time

limit for oral arguments in this Hon'ble Court in a manner
this Hon'ble Court may deem appropriate.

E. Pass any other or further order or orders as this Hon'ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and to
meet the ends of justice.

14.Interim relief, if any: No interim relief is prayed.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, I, YOUR HUMBLE

PETITIONER, AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY

Place: New Delhi

Drafted on: 18.08.2020
E-filed on: 19.08.2020

DR. SUBHASH VIJAYRAN

(PETITIONER-IN-PERSON)