Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025) - Case Analysis

Why in the Spotlight? - Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025)

The 2- Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan on 15th January, 2025, issued directions for the construction of public washrooms in the premises of the Court. The Bench also held that it is the responsibility of the Government and Local Authorities to provide basic amenities.

Introduction of Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025)

Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025) is a landmark case which revolves around the issue of inadequate sanitation facilities. A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by Advocate Rajeeb Kalita under Article 32 of Constitution and sought to ensure availability of hygienic toilets in court premises for men, women, transgender persons and persons with disabilities. The judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajeeb Kalita case considered access to sanitation as a fundamental right under Article 21. The Court reinforced the responsibility of the State to provide basic amenities.

Download Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India 2025 PDF

Historical Context and Facts of Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025)

The case at hand centres around a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed under Article 32 of Indian Constitution and sought the enforcement of the fundamental right to dignity by ensuring adequate and hygienic toilet facilities in courts and tribunals across India for men, women, transgender persons and persons with disabilities. The following are the brief facts of the case of Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India -

Filing of the Writ Petition

A Public Interest Litigation was filed under Article 32 of Indian Constitution highlighting the lack of proper sanitation facilities in courts and tribunals across the nation. The Petitioner Rajeeb Kalita, a practicing Advocate hailing from Assam, sought directions in the case of Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India from the Supreme Court of India to ensure the availability of clean and hygienic toilets in all court premises for men, women, transgender persons and persons with disabilities.

Arguments of the Petitioner

The Petitioner Rajeeb Kalita contended that the fundamental right to live with dignity under Article 21 of Indian Constitution extends to access to basic hygiene and sanitation facilities. The absence of proper toilet facilities in court complexes diminish this right. In Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India, the Petitioner also highlighted the responsibility of the State under Article 47 to improve public health and under Article 48A to ensure environmental protection. He asserted that these constitutional directives were being overlooked.

Relevance of National and International Guidelines

The Petitioner referred to a nationwide initiative by the Ministry of Urban Development ‘Swachh Bharat Mission’ (SBM) which provides guidelines for building public washrooms. The Petitioner in Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India also cited International standards and policies on sanitation. He highlighted the universal importance of access to hygienic toilet facilities.

Emphasis on Court Premises

The Petitioner Rajeeb Kalita underlined the serious need for sanitation facilities in court complexes. He also argued that failing to provide these basic amenities in courts compromises the dignity and health of individuals which renders fundamental right to life under Article 21 meaningless.

Interim Directions issued by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on 8th May, 2023 issued interim directions regarding concerns raised in the petition. The Court directed all High Courts to submit affidavits explaining the availability and maintenance of washroom facilities for men, women and transgender persons in their jurisdictions. The Supreme Court also ordered High Courts to report on the provision of separate facilities for litigants, lawyers and judicial officers and to confirm whether sanitary napkin dispensers were available in the women’s washroom.

Compliance by High Courts

All the High Courts in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court filed affidavits and provided detailed accounts of sanitation facilities in their respective jurisdictions. The High Courts were also ordered to upload relevant data onto the ‘iJuris portal’. It is a platform which was recently operationalized by the Supreme Court to ensure transparency and accountability.

Issue addressed in Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025)

Whether the right to access proper and hygienic sanitation facilities is a fundamental right under Article 21 of Constitution was the main question which was addressed in the case of Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India.

Legal Provisions involved in Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025)

Article 21, Article 47 and Article 48A of the Constitution played a significant role. The following are the analysis of these provisions-

Article 21 of Indian Constitution: Protection of Life and Personal Liberty

Article 21 deals with protection of life and personal liberty. It states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

Article 47 Indian Constitution: Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health

“The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.”

Interpretation of Article 47: Article 47 highlights the responsibility of the State to enhance-

• nutrition levels
• living standards
• public health of its citizens

Article 48A Indian Constitution: Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wildlife

“The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.”

Interpretation of Article 48A: Article 48A establishes the duty of the State to protect and enhance the environment as well as to safeguard the forests and wildlife. This Article was inserted by 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.

Judgment and Impact of Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India (2025)

On 15th January, 2025, the 2-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan in Rajeeb Kalita Vs. Union of India (2025) held that access to sanitation is a fundamental right under Article 21 of Indian Constitution.

The Supreme Court underlined that providing proper sanitation is essential to upholding human dignity and well-being and it is the responsibility of the State to ensure a healthy environment including availability of sanitation facilities in public spaces like court premises.

View of Supreme Court Access to Justice and Basic Amenities

The Supreme Court in Rajeeb Katila vs Union of India noted that access to justice should not be hindered by the lack of basic amenities such as washroom facilities. It also indicated concern over lack of proper washroom facilities in district courts especially in rural areas. The Court observed that this failure diminishes the reputation of the judicial system and infringes the rights of those affected.

Directives of Supreme Court for Improving Sanitation in Court Premises

In Rajeeb Katila vs Union of India the Supreme Court issued a directions for High Courts to take immediate action to deal with the lack of proper washroom facilities in court premises. The Court instructed construction of separate toilets for men, women, persons with disabilities and transgender in all court premises and ensure these facilities are clearly identifiable and accessible to all. Additionally, the Supreme Court ordered the establishment of oversight committees in each High Court to monitor the implementation of these directives.

Key Case Laws Discussed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court in Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India cited various previous precedents that held sanitation as an important part of the right to life and dignity. The Court acknowledged Vincent Panikurlangara v. Union of India and Common Cause v. Union of India where it was held that it is the obligation of the State to provide healthy living conditions.

International Examples of Sanitation Solutions

The Court also referred to international examples of sanitation solutions such as ‘Toilet for All’ initiative of Germany and ‘all-gender universal toilets’ of Japan indicating that India could adapt similar practices.

Significance of Rajeeb Kalita Case (2025)

The decision in Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India is significant because it recognized right to sanitation as a part of right to life and set a precedent for the provision of basic amenities in public spaces.

Conclusion

Rajeeb Kalita vs Union of India case underlined the fundamental right to access sanitation facilities under Article 21. The Court highlighted that it is the responsibility of State to provide hygienic and accessible toilets in court premises.