Constitutional basis of judicial review (Articles 32 & 226)
📜 Constitutional Basis of Judicial Review in India (Articles 32 & 226)
I. Introduction
Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to examine and invalidate legislative and executive actions that violate the Constitution. It is a fundamental feature of the Indian Constitution, ensuring supremacy of the Constitution, protection of fundamental rights, and upholding rule of law.
II. Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Review
1. Article 32 – The Right to Constitutional Remedies
Called the "heart and soul" of the Constitution by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
Guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court has the power to issue writs like Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo-Warranto to enforce fundamental rights.
Provides a safeguard against legislative and executive violations of fundamental rights.
2. Article 226 – Power of High Courts to issue Writs
Empowers High Courts to issue writs for enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose.
This is broader than Article 32 as it can be invoked even for violation of non-fundamental rights and other legal rights.
The writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and is a crucial tool for administrative and constitutional justice.
III. Nature and Scope of Judicial Review under Articles 32 and 226
| Aspect | Article 32 | Article 226 |
|---|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court | High Courts (all states) |
| Purpose | Enforcement of Fundamental Rights only | Enforcement of Fundamental and other legal rights |
| Power | Issue of writs mandatory on violation of rights | Discretionary writ jurisdiction |
| Scope | Limited to fundamental rights | Wider scope, including administrative actions |
| Accessibility | Direct petition possible | Usually after other remedies exhausted |
IV. Landmark Case Laws on Judicial Review (Articles 32 & 226)
1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225
Issue: Extent of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution.
Held:
Established the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution and cannot be abrogated.
The Supreme Court asserted its power under Article 32 to strike down unconstitutional amendments.
Significance:
Affirmed that judicial review protects the Constitution’s supremacy.
2. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980) 3 SCC 625
Issue: Validity of amendments curtailing judicial review.
Held:
Declared parts of the 42nd Amendment unconstitutional for violating the basic structure, including judicial review.
Reiterated that judicial review is integral to the Constitution.
Significance:
Reinforced the role of judicial review as a check on legislative and executive excess.
3. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) AIR 597
Issue: Passport impounded without hearing; violation of Article 21.
Held:
Expanded the scope of fundamental rights and judicial review.
Introduced the principle of due process, requiring reasonableness and fairness.
Judicial review ensures administrative action is not arbitrary.
Significance:
Judicial review extends beyond mere legality to procedural fairness.
4. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) 2 SCC 521
Issue: Validity of suspension of fundamental rights during Emergency.
Held:
Majority held that during Emergency, even Article 21 could be suspended.
Dissent by Justice H.R. Khanna upheld the inviolability of right to life and liberty.
Significance:
Later overruled, affirming judicial review as a protector of fundamental rights even in emergencies.
5. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 1
Issue: Dismissal of state governments under Article 356.
Held:
Judicial review is essential to check misuse of Article 356 (President’s Rule).
Courts can examine whether the constitutional breakdown is genuine.
Supreme Court laid down guidelines to prevent arbitrary dismissal of elected governments.
Significance:
Judicial review protects federal structure and democratic rights.
6. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 SCC 241
Issue: Absence of legislation on sexual harassment at workplace.
Held:
Supreme Court used judicial review to fill legislative vacuum by laying down guidelines.
Emphasized protection of fundamental rights through judicial activism.
Significance:
Judicial review ensures enforcement of rights even in the absence of legislation.
7. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1
Issue: Right to privacy as fundamental right.
Held:
Recognized right to privacy under Article 21.
Reinforced judicial review as a tool to protect evolving fundamental rights.
Significance:
Demonstrates dynamic nature of judicial review to protect rights in new contexts.
V. Important Aspects of Judicial Review
Judicial review protects Fundamental Rights: Article 32 allows direct petition for enforcement.
Wider High Court jurisdiction: Article 226 enables High Courts to act as guardians of all legal rights.
Checks and balances: Judicial review restrains abuse of power by Legislature and Executive.
Basic Structure Doctrine: Judicial review is entrenched in the Constitution as a non-derogable feature.
Administrative law tool: Courts ensure reasonableness, fairness, and legality in executive decisions.
VI. Summary Table of Cases
| Case | Key Holding | Importance |
|---|---|---|
| Kesavananda Bharati (1973) | Judicial review is basic structure | Limits Parliament’s power |
| Minerva Mills (1980) | Judicial review integral; limits constitutional amendments | Upholds supremacy of Constitution |
| Maneka Gandhi (1978) | Expanded due process, fairness in administrative action | Due process & fairness in executive decisions |
| ADM Jabalpur (1976) | Emergency suspension of rights debated | Emphasized judicial role even in emergencies |
| S.R. Bommai (1994) | Review of dismissal of state governments | Protects federalism and democracy |
| Vishaka (1997) | Judicial activism to protect rights | Courts can create law in legislative gaps |
| Puttaswamy (2017) | Right to privacy recognized under Article 21 | Modern expansion of fundamental rights |
VII. Conclusion
Articles 32 and 226 provide the constitutional foundation for judicial review in India.
Judicial review ensures enforcement of fundamental rights, checks arbitrary power, and upholds constitutional supremacy.
The Supreme Court and High Courts play a pivotal role in preserving democracy and rule of law through these provisions.
Judicial review in India has evolved as a dynamic and powerful tool to balance the powers of legislature and executive, protect individual rights, and maintain the Constitution’s sanctity.
RELATED Blog
0 comments