Judicial Review

Published on 15 Jan 2025

Judicial Review

Judicial Review can be understood as a form of court proceeding,  where the lawfulness of a decision is reviewed by the judiciary. The basic concern behind the judicial review is whether the law has been correctly applied and the right procedures have been followed.

Article 13 of the Indian constitution explicitly speaks of judicial review where the court has the power to strike off legislation which are inconsistent with fundamental rights. Under Articles 32 and 226, an individual can respectively approach the Supreme Court or the High Court for the violation of their fundamental rights. Thus, the combined application of Articles 13, 32 and 226 provides the ground for judicial review doctrine in the Indian context.

Grounds for Judicial Review

• Amendments violative of basic constitutional values: Constitutional legislation shall not come under Article 13, but these amendments can be held unconstitutional and be ruled out if they violate the basic structure of the Indian constitution.

• Example: The judiciary struck down the 99th amendment, which replaced collegium with NJAC, citing a violation of judicial independence.

• Lack of jurisdiction: The judiciary can intervene when an authority performs an action beyond its jurisdiction.

• Example: In Rafiq Khan vs State of U.P. 1954, the High Court ruled that the Sub Divisional Magistrate has no authority to modify the order passed by Panchayat Adalat and limited the action of the Magistrate within the jurisdiction.

• Abuse of jurisdiction: Even when the authority has the power, actions must be in good faith. If not, the judiciary has the power to strike them down.

• Example: In Pratap Singh vs State of Punjab, the Supreme Court quashed an order dismissing a civil surgeon as it involved misuse of power by the Chief Minister’s office.

• To correct an obvious mistake: A mistake is proclaimed to be obvious when one can establish such an inference just by analysing the record without having to rely on any other information.

• Irrationality: A decision from the authority shall be considered irrational when it’s not based on evidence and is based on considerations that are irrelevant and extraneous.

• Example: The Associated Provincial Picture House Ltd. vs Wednesbury Corporation case introduced the test of irrationality for judicial review.

• Procedural impropriety: When fair procedure has not been followed in administrative actions, the judiciary has the power to strike them down.

• Proportionality: The administrative authority shall not be more drastic than it ought to be to seek the desired outcome.

Example: In the Chairman of All India Railway Board vs Shyam Kumar case 2010, the court defined the proportionality test as the least injurious means for protecting the fundamental rights of citizens and guaranteeing a fair equilibrium between individual rights and the public interests.

Tags:
Polity

Keywords:
Indian Judiciary Judicial review Article 13

Syllabus:
General Studies Paper 2

Topics:
Functions of Judiciary