The “Alternative Dispute Resolution” mechanism has shaped the way we see the role and functioning of courts in the society. The Alternative Dispute Resolution has emphasized to provide better dispute resolution processes. Access to justice is crucial aspect of ensuring the enforcement of the fundamental rights. The cases are pending before the courts because of its complicated procedure which increase the backlog of the cases and it simultaneously incur high costs. The judicial process is not only expensive for an ordinary person but also takes many years to deliver the justice. To overcome the criticised delay in justice delivery, the adoption of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms like Lok Adalat, arbitration, mediation and conciliation was thought and subsequently practiced. Equal opportunity mandates access to justice. Being treated equally is not sufficient, regardless the prevalent inequalities. Law must function in such a way that every individual have access to justice despite of the economic disparities. It refers to any type of obstacle for the people to have a practical and usable way to realize their legal rights. ADR is the dispute resolution process through which the disagreeing parties come to an agreement short of litigation. It is generally an alternative to the formal court hearing and litigation. It is a process through which the parties can settle disputes, with or without the help of the third party. This paper critically analyses the ways in which Alternate Dispute Resolution mechanism has ensured access to justice to the poor and marginalized people. It focuses on the alternative methods through which society gets access to justice.