Understand the key principles of judicial review
Key Principles of Judicial Review: Detailed Explanation
What is Judicial Review?
Judicial Review is the power of courts to examine the actions of the legislative, executive, or administrative branches of government and to ensure they conform to the Constitution or established laws. It is a cornerstone of the rule of law and checks and balances in a democratic system.
In India, judicial review primarily ensures that:
Laws and executive actions are within constitutional limits.
Fundamental rights and other legal rights are protected.
The government acts lawfully, fairly, and reasonably.
Key Principles of Judicial Review
1. Legality
The court examines whether the action or law conforms to the Constitution and legal provisions.
Actions beyond the power (ultra vires) are invalid.
2. Procedural Fairness / Natural Justice
Administrative decisions must follow fair procedures, including the right to be heard and absence of bias.
3. Reasonableness
Decisions should not be arbitrary or irrational; they must pass the “Wednesbury reasonableness” test — no action is unreasonable unless no reasonable authority would have taken it.
4. Proportionality
Especially in fundamental rights cases, actions must be proportionate to the objective and not excessively restrictive.
5. Non-Arbitrariness
Actions must be based on relevant considerations, not whimsical or discriminatory.
6. Separation of Powers
Courts do not substitute their views for policy decisions but ensure constitutional limits are respected.
Important Case Laws Explaining Principles of Judicial Review
1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461
Facts:
This landmark case questioned Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
Holding:
The Supreme Court ruled that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter the basic structure or framework.
Significance:
Established the Basic Structure Doctrine — a cornerstone of judicial review.
Ensures judicial review protects the core constitutional identity.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
Facts:
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded without fair hearing.
Holding:
The Court expanded Article 21 to include procedural fairness and reasonableness.
Significance:
Judicial review protects due process and fairness.
Actions affecting personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable.
3. A.K. Roy v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 710
Facts:
An ordinance was promulgated to seize land, and the petitioner challenged the constitutionality.
Holding:
The Court held that administrative actions or legislation must be reasonable and conform to constitutional norms.
Significance:
Reinforced the reasonableness principle in judicial review.
Prevents arbitrary or oppressive laws.
4. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (Judges Case I), AIR 1982 SC 149
Facts:
The case dealt with appointment of judges and executive interference.
Holding:
The Court held that judicial appointments are subject to judicial review to prevent arbitrary interference.
Significance:
Ensured checks on executive power through judicial review.
Emphasized independence of judiciary.
5. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180
Facts:
Eviction of pavement dwellers challenged as violation of right to livelihood.
Holding:
The Court held that the right to livelihood is part of Article 21 and evictions must be reasonable and follow due process.
Significance:
Judicial review protects socio-economic rights.
Requires proportionality and due process in administrative actions.
6. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086
Facts:
Environmental pollution control measures challenged by industries.
Holding:
The Court applied the precautionary principle and held the state’s duty to protect environment is subject to judicial review.
Significance:
Expanded judicial review to include environmental governance.
Enforces public interest through judicial oversight.
Summary Table of Case Laws and Judicial Review Principles
| Case | Year | Principle Highlighted | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kesavananda Bharati | 1973 | Basic Structure Doctrine | Limits constitutional amendments |
| Maneka Gandhi | 1978 | Procedural fairness and reasonableness | Expanded due process in administrative actions |
| A.K. Roy | 1982 | Reasonableness | Prevents arbitrary laws and actions |
| S.P. Gupta | 1982 | Judicial independence and appointment | Controls executive interference |
| Olga Tellis | 1986 | Right to livelihood and proportionality | Judicial review protects socio-economic rights |
| M.C. Mehta | 1987 | Environmental protection | Judicial review enforces public interest |
Conclusion
Judicial review is an essential mechanism to ensure that state power is exercised within constitutional limits, respecting fundamental rights and principles of fairness. The judiciary acts as a guardian of the Constitution by scrutinizing laws and administrative actions, promoting accountability, transparency, and justice.
The key principles—legality, natural justice, reasonableness, proportionality, and non-arbitrariness—guide courts in reviewing governmental decisions without encroaching upon legitimate policy-making.
RELATED Blog
0 comments