Judicial Review And The Indian Courts - 2740 Words

JUDICIAL REVIEW AND THE INDIAN COURTS Introduction Judicial Review is basically an aspect of judicial power of the state which is exercised by the courts to determine the validity of a rule of law or an action of any agency of the state. The courts have the power of testing the validity of legislative as well as other governmental action with reference to the provisions of the constitution. The judiciary tries to undo the harm that is being done by the legislature and executive and they also try to provide every citizen what has been guaranteed by the constitution. Judicial review has a more technical significance in pubic law, particularly in countries having a written constitution which are founded on the concept of limited government.†¦show more content†¦Judicial Review in India The constitution of India, in this respect, is more similar to the U.S. Constitution than the British. Under the constitution of India parliament is not supreme. Its powers are limited in the two ways. First, there is the division of powers between the union and the states. Parliament is competent to pass laws only with respect to those subjects which are guaranteed to the citizens against every form of legislative encroachment. The power of judicial review of legislation is given to the judiciary both by the political theory and text of the constitution. There are several specific provisions in the Indian constitution, judicial review of legislation such as Act 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, 145, 246, 251, 254 and 372. Judicial review is a great weapon in the hands of judges. It comprises the power of a court to hold unconstitutional and unenforceable any law or order based upon such law or any other action by a public authority which is inconsistent or in conflict with the basic law of the land. In fact, the study of constitutional law may be described as a study of the doctrine of judicial review in action. The courts have power to strike down any law, if they believe it to be unconstitutional. In the case I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu the court laid down a two-fold test: : (a) whether an amendment or a law is violative of any of the Fundamental Rights in Part III (b) if so, whether the violation