ACCESS TO JUSTICE TOWARDS THE CREATION OF INCLUSIVE SOCIAL ORDER the added initiative to move from the procedural Code to the realm of substantive law, in our own view, the mediation method with detailed directives, supported and facilitated by Internet technology (resolving the issues of space and time), is likely to gain the requisite momentum and, thereby, meaningfully expanding the arena of access to justice in the creation of inclusive society. 3. Creation of inclusive society by having Access to Justice without the intervention of Courts Access to justice, as delineated above, is the underlying basic principle of the ‘rule of law’. Following the common law tradition, it is often invoked whenever there occurs a violation of a ‘legal right’, that is a right (as stated jurisprudentially by the distinguished judge and jurist John William Salmond), which is recognised and applied by the State in the administration of justice. A clear manifestation of this facet of right is reflected in Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution. By virtue of Article 32 and its juxtaposition, this right is not only the fundamental right of every citizen to move the highest court of the land by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights enunciated in Part III of the Constitution,67 but also, by reason of its inclusion in Part III, the remedial right itself becomes the fundamental right, implying thereby that the right to move the court is an inviolable fundamental right. Likewise, under Article 226, every High Court shall have the power to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction.68 Here, the only jurisdictional caveat in case of High Court is that the cause of action, wholly or in part, must have arisen for the exercise of such power, “notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.”69 The clear implication is that the whole notion of ‘access to justice’ means, nothing more and nothing less but, ‘access to courts’, because courts are the constitutionally recognised ‘temples 67 68 69 Under clause (2) of Article 32 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court shall have power “to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate,” for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III. Clause (1) of Article 226 of the Constitution. Clause (2) of Article 226 of the Constitution. 15