न्यायिक समीक्षा की शक्ति क्या है?

Judicial review is the power of courts to review and, if necessary, invalidate actions or laws that are inconsistent with the Constitution. In India, judicial review plays a vital role in maintaining the rule of law and ensuring that government actions are within constitutional limits. Key Aspects of Judicial Review in India: 1. Constitutional Foundation: - Article 13 of the Indian Constitution provides the foundation for judicial review. It states that any law inconsistent with or in contravention of the Constitution is void. - The Supreme Court of India under Article 32 and High Courts under Article 226 have the power to review legislative and executive actions to ensure they conform to the Constitution. 2. Scope of Judicial Review: - The power of judicial review allows courts to examine the constitutionality of laws passed by the Parliament or state legislatures, executive actions, and administrative decisions. - Courts can also review whether actions taken by public authorities or bodies are within their jurisdiction and in line with constitutional rights. 3. Role in Protecting Fundamental Rights: - Judicial review is crucial in safeguarding Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. If any law or government action violates these rights, the courts can declare it unconstitutional and strike it down. - This is one of the key mechanisms through which the Supreme Court and High Courts protect citizens' rights. 4. Limits of Judicial Review: - Judicial review does not mean that courts can interfere in matters of policy. Courts will not question the wisdom or appropriateness of a policy decision unless it is found to be unconstitutional, irrational, or arbitrary. - The scope of judicial review is also limited in the case of amendments to the Constitution. For example, the basic structure doctrine, as established in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), limits the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution in a way that alters its "basic structure." 5. Doctrine of Basic Structure: - The basic structure doctrine was introduced by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). It holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, rule of law, separation of powers, and fundamental rights, cannot be altered by Parliament even through constitutional amendments. 6. Judicial Review of Executive and Administrative Actions: - Courts can also review the validity of executive orders, rules, and regulations issued by the government. If these actions are found to be unconstitutional, the courts have the power to declare them void. - Courts can also check if the government has acted beyond its authority or in violation of the principles of natural justice. Mechanisms of Judicial Review: 1. Public Interest Litigation (PIL): - Judicial review in India is often exercised through Public Interest Litigation (PIL), where any citizen can approach the court to seek a remedy for a public cause, even if they are not directly affected by the issue. 2. Power of Courts: - Supreme Court: The Supreme Court has the ultimate authority to conduct judicial review. Under Article 32, citizens can directly approach the Supreme Court if their fundamental rights are violated. - High Courts: Under Article 226, High Courts can also review matters related to the constitutionality of laws and executive actions within their jurisdiction. Examples of Judicial Review: 1. Golaknath Case (1967): The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution to alter its basic structure, thereby establishing the concept of judicial review over constitutional amendments. 2. Minerva Mills Case (1980): The Supreme Court held that the balance between fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy is part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be altered. 3. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and ruled that it cannot be curtailed unless due procedure established by law is followed. This case also emphasized the role of judicial review in protecting fundamental rights. Conclusion: Judicial review in India ensures that the laws and actions of the government are in conformity with the Constitution. It acts as a safeguard for fundamental rights and provides a system of checks and balances to ensure that the legislature and executive do not exceed their powers. While the judiciary has broad powers in judicial review, it operates within certain constitutional limits, such as not interfering with policy decisions unless they are unconstitutional.

Dear Client, In India, it refers to the judiciary being able, mainly through the Supreme Court and High Courts, to evaluate whether laws passed by the government are in line with the Constitution. Such laws or actions that go against the Constitution can be legally invalidated. The Constitution Equips Courts to Perform Judicial Review; Though the term judicial review is not found in the Indian Constitution, several articles let the judiciary enforce the rule of the constitution. Laws in conflict with or reducing fundamental rights are not allowed under Article 13. All individuals are entitled to approach the Supreme Court in order to enforce their fundamental rights. High Courts can issue writs in Article 226 to protect fundamental rights and for any additional reason. Article 131-136 shows the Supreme Court’s mandate to oversee many cases, even as the final court of appeal and as the original court deciding particular issues. The Article 143 allows the President to ask for the Supreme Court’s view on complex questions. Together, they shape how judicial review takes place in India. Importance and Area There are several aspects to judicial review in India which cover: Reviewing if laws enacted by Parliament and state legislatures comply with the constitution. Evaluating executive decisions, actions and policies to be sure they are in line with what the constitution says. Acting on Administrative Decisions: Checking whether officials have based decisions on the law and made valid judgments. As a result, any branch of the government knows it cannot exceed the set rules in the constitution. Landmark Judgments Kesavananda Bharati v. In Kerala in 1973, it was established that core aspects or the basic structure of the Constitution are protected from being changed by any amendment. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): Reaffirmed that judicial review is a part of the Constitution. Recent Applications Judicial review still plays an important part in managing government affairs. For example, last week the Supreme Court disallowed a Madhya Pradesh order that allowed IAS officers to join in appraising Indian Forest Service officers, stating that the forest department needs to keep its independence. Conclusion Judicial review in India is necessary to make sure the rule of law exists and all citizens’ rights, against wrongful actions, are protected by the law. Judicial review guarantees the Constitution dominates in government and all branches retain a balance of power. I hope this answer helps. In case of future queries please feel free to contact us. Thank you.