Judicial Review: Concept and Significance

 

AUTHOR: SHIVANSHU KATARE

Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. It acts as a check on the powers of the other branches of government, ensuring that laws and actions align with the Constitution. The concept is central to constitutional governance and upholds the rule of law by ensuring that no law or government action can exceed the powers granted by the Constitution.

Historical Background of Judicial Review

• The concept of Judicial Review is rooted in the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances, where the judiciary acts as a counterbalance to the powers of the executive and legislature.
• The American system is credited with solidifying the doctrine of judicial review, primarily through the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison (1803), where Chief Justice John Marshall asserted the Court's power to review acts of Congress and the executive branch, declaring that courts have the authority to invalidate unconstitutional laws.

Judicial Review in India

In India, judicial review is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but it is derived from the Doctrine of Basic Structure and Articles 13, 32, and 226 of the Indian Constitution.

• Article 13: It provides that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights shall be void. It empowers the judiciary to declare laws that violate the Constitution as unconstitutional.
• Article 32: It provides the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, thereby also giving the judiciary the authority to examine the constitutionality of laws.
• Article 226: It allows High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose, which also involves judicial review of legislative and executive actions.

Significance of Judicial Review

1. Guarding Fundamental Rights: Judicial review ensures the protection of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
2. Ensuring the Constitutionality of Laws: It ensures that no law or government action exceeds the powers conferred by the Constitution.
3. Check on Arbitrary Power: It acts as a check on the executive and legislature, preventing arbitrary laws and actions.
4. Preserving the Rule of Law: It ensures that laws and actions conform to constitutional principles, maintaining the rule of law.

---

Landmark Case Laws on Judicial Review in India

1. Marbury v. Madison (1803) [USA]

• Court: United States Supreme Court
• Facts: The case involved a dispute over the appointment of judicial officers by President John Adams. The Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Marshall, asserted its power to review acts of Congress.
• Principle: This case established the principle of judicial review in the U.S. and laid the foundation for judicial oversight of legislative and executive actions, which influenced other democratic systems, including India.

2. Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case involved a challenge to the Constitution (24th Amendment) Act, 1971, which sought to curtail the power of judicial review.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court, in a landmark judgment, held that the basic structure doctrine is part of the Constitution. The Court ruled that Parliament could not amend the Constitution in such a way that it would alter the fundamental structure of the Constitution.
• Significance: This case firmly entrenched the principle of judicial review in Indian law, ensuring that judicial review is an essential feature of the Constitution and that laws inconsistent with the Constitution could be struck down.

3. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case challenged the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, which sought to limit judicial review and reduce the power of the courts in protecting fundamental rights.
• Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled that judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution and cannot be abolished or curtailed. It held that both the power of judicial review and the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy are essential to the Constitution’s basic structure.
• Significance: The Court reaffirmed the importance of judicial review as part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

4. Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case dealt with the issue of whether Parliament had the power to amend fundamental rights.
• Ruling: The Court ruled that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution to alter or take away fundamental rights. The Court held that the power of judicial review was essential in ensuring that fundamental rights are protected.
• Significance: This case reinforced the power of judicial review and confirmed that the judiciary has the final say on the constitutionality of amendments to the Constitution.

5. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: This case examined the validity of the President's rule imposed on states under Article 356 of the Constitution.
• Ruling: The Court held that judicial review is applicable to the imposition of President's rule, meaning that the Court could assess whether the proclamation of President's Rule is based on relevant material and proper constitutional grounds.
• Significance: This case highlighted the Court’s power to review the actions of the executive under Article 356 and solidified the Court’s authority in matters of federal governance.

6. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case involved the constitutionality of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which sought to exclude judicial review by the High Courts over tribunal decisions.
• Ruling: The Court ruled that the judicial review of the High Courts under Article 226 cannot be ousted by any law or provision, and that the power of judicial review is vested in the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
• Significance: The judgment reaffirmed that judicial review is an essential feature of the Constitution that cannot be taken away or diminished.

7. Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case dealt with the validity of the Constitution (39th Amendment) Act, which sought to prevent judicial review of the election of the Prime Minister.
• Ruling: The Court held that judicial review is an essential feature of the Constitution and struck down the provision of the 39th Amendment that sought to prevent judicial review of the Prime Minister's election.
• Significance: This case affirmed that no law, even constitutional amendments, can take away the power of judicial review.

8. T. K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case involved the validity of a government decision to cancel an earlier order of promotion.
• Ruling: The Court ruled that the decision was arbitrary and violated principles of fairness. This case reiterated the power of judicial review in cases involving executive action.
• Significance: It reinforced the judicial review of executive actions for ensuring adherence to principles of justice, fairness, and constitutional validity.

9. Rajbala v. State of Haryana (2015)

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Facts: The case challenged the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which imposed educational qualifications for contesting Panchayat elections.
• Ruling: The Court upheld the law, stating that legislative and executive actions, including laws related to elections, are subject to judicial review.
• Significance: The case demonstrates the Court's role in reviewing legislative measures even in matters related to elections and local governance.

---

Conclusion

Judicial review plays a pivotal role in maintaining the integrity of the Constitution and ensuring that no law or action exceeds the powers provided under it. The Indian judiciary has consistently upheld the importance of judicial review through landmark judgments, thereby safeguarding the rights of individuals and ensuring the supremacy of the Constitution. The power of judicial review is a cornerstone of India’s democracy, acting as a check on both the legislature and the executive.