Maharashtra State Board Class 11 Political Science Solutions Chapter 6 Role of the Judiciary
1A. Choose the correct alternative and complete the following statements.
1B. Identify the incorrect pair in every set, correct it and rewrite.
1C. State the appropriate concept for the given statement.
2. Complete the concept map.
3. State whether the following statements are true or false with reasons.
4. Explain the co-relation between the following.
There are many instances where the executive is a party to a dispute either as the plaintiff or as the defendant. Given the power of the Government, any legal dispute between it and one or more citizens is usually unequal. There is a possibility that the Government would use its powers to secure a favourable decision. This is where the independence of the Judiciary becomes important. An independent judiciary ensures that all those who appear before it is treated on an equal plane, and thus makes sure that decisions are in accordance with the law.
Supreme Court has original Jurisdiction such as in disputes about the election of the President or Vice¬President which are its exclusive jurisdiction. Both, Supreme Court and High Court have Writ Jurisdiction i.e., they can issue directives or writs such as Habeas Corpus in case of violation of a person’s fundamental rights. In case of appointment of judges of High Courts, the President also consults the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
5. Express your opinion of the following.
However, according to the 42nd Amendment Act, the President acts on the aid and advice of the Union Ministry, Hence, executive interference in judicial appointments is a real possibility. Since the 1990s, the Supreme Court ruled that the Judiciary must play a leading role in its judicial appointments.
The Supreme Court set up a Collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges of the court which would recommend names to the President for appointment to the Supreme Court and the High Courts. The Government’s role in this process has now been minimized.
In recent years, Judicial Activism has led to the courts examining the legality of the decision of the executive over a wide variety of issues including the ones referred to above. Moreover, in many instances, they have also either issued orders on what should be done over many issues or have directed the executive to take action about the same in a specified time period.
There has been much debate over Judicial Activism. Some feel that the judiciary was compelled to intervene because the executive was not discharging its functions properly, while others believe that the courts are exceeding their powers by looking into matters which fall within the jurisdiction of the executive or legislative.
6. Answer the following in detail with reference to the given points.
(b) Need: It becomes necessary to have an institution that would examine whether the laws are consistent with the Constitution or not. That institution should also have the power to declare any law found inconsistent with the Constitution to be invalid and therefore not to be implemented. This would prevent the Legislature from making laws that violate the Constitution. In democracies with written Constitutions, this power is vested in the Judiciary. The Judiciary is not involved in any way in the law-making process. It is an independent body. Hence it has been assigned this power.
(c) When and where it started: The origins of the power of Judicial Review can be traced to a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America given in 1803 in a case known as the Marbury vs Madison case. This was for the first time that the American Supreme Court declared a law passed by the United States Congress to be invalid on the grounds that it was inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. However, it must be noted that the American Constitution does not have an explicit provision that gives the Judiciary the power of Judicial Review. It is an implied power. To date, the American Supreme Court’s power of Judicial Review has been unchallenged. This is so because it is accepted that such a power is necessary to retain the supremacy of the Constitution.
(d) Indian Context: The Constitution of India does not explicitly provide the judiciary with the power of Judicial Review. However, like in the United States, these powers are implied. The Supreme Court of India has on many occasions declared laws passed by the Legislature as being inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore unconstitutional. In the Indian context, the real issue has been whether the amendments to the Constitution can be held unconstitutional. The issue was settled by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). In its judgment, the Court stated that the Constitution of India had a ‘Basic Structure’. The Constitutional Amendments passed by the Parliament have to be consistent with this ‘Basic Structure’, and if they are found to be not, then the Supreme Court would declare them unconstitutional. The power to declare any Amendments as unconstitutional rests only with the Supreme Court.
Activity (Text Book Page No. 52)
Make a list of examples of Judicial Activism in India.
Answer:
Judicial Activism refers to the active role of the judiciary in upholding the rights of citizens and preserving constitutional provisions and the legal system of the country. The judiciary takes an active part wherever the legislature of executive fails to perform its duty, especially to dispense social justice.
Some areas of judicial activism include: