Judicial Review of Executive/Policy Decisions
Indian Polity & Governance
- PYQs12
- Articles1
Foundation
Static background & why it matters
Judicial Review is the power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality and legality of legislative enactments and executive orders of both the Central and State governments. This power is explicitly and implicitly enshrined in various articles of the Indian Constitution, serving as a cornerstone of the rule of law and a guardian of fundamental rights and the constitutional scheme.
It is a fundamental feature of the Indian Constitution, ensuring checks and balances and upholding the rule of law. UPSC frequently asks about the powers and functions of the judiciary, including its role in scrutinizing government actions and policies.
- Origin
- Marbury v. Madison (USA, 1803) established the principle of judicial review.
- Constitutional Basis (India)
- Articles 13, 32, 226, 136, 142, 246.
- Basic Structure Doctrine
- Judicial Review is an integral part of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution (Kesavananda Bharati case, 1973), meaning it cannot be abrogated even by a constitutional amendment.
- Rule of Law
- Ensures that all governmental actions are subject to law and the Constitution.
Static core
Acts, bodies, facts & tables
The scope of Judicial Review in India is wider than in the USA as it covers not only legislative and executive actions but also constitutional amendments (post-Kesavananda Bharati case). It acts as a crucial check on legislative overreach and executive arbitrariness, ensuring the supremacy of the Constitution.
Grounds for Judicial Review of executive and policy decisions include unconstitutionality (violating fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions), illegality (action being ultra vires or contrary to statutory provisions), irrationality (Wednesbury unreasonableness, where a decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have come to it), procedural impropriety (failure to observe rules of natural justice or statutory procedures), and proportionality (action taken is disproportionate to the objective sought).
- Part of Basic Structure
- Judicial Review is an unamendable feature of the Indian Constitution.
- Guardian of Constitution
- Ensures constitutional supremacy and upholds the rule of law.
- Check on Power
- Prevents legislative overreach and executive arbitrariness.
- Judicial Activism
- Sometimes leads to the judiciary encroaching on executive/legislative domains, raising concerns about separation of powers.
- Judicial Restraint
- Principle advising the judiciary to defer to other branches unless there is a clear constitutional or legal violation.
- Role in Federalism
- Resolves disputes between Centre and States regarding legislative competence.
| Feature | Article 32 (Supreme Court) | Article 226 (High Courts) |
|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Original and Exclusive for Fundamental Rights | Original and Concurrent for Fundamental Rights, also for other legal rights |
| Scope | Limited to Fundamental Rights | Wider, includes Fundamental Rights and other legal rights |
| Remedy | Fundamental Right itself; SC cannot refuse | Discretionary; HC may refuse |
| Territorial Reach | Throughout India | Within its territorial jurisdiction or where cause of action arises |
| Ground | Description |
|---|---|
| Unconstitutionality | Violates Fundamental Rights or other constitutional provisions (e.g., federal structure, separation of powers). |
| Illegality | Action is ultra vires (beyond legal authority) or contrary to statutory provisions. |
| Irrationality | Decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have come to it (Wednesbury unreasonableness). |
| Procedural Impropriety | Failure to observe rules of natural justice (e.g., audi alteram partem) or statutory procedures. |
| Proportionality | Action taken is disproportionate to the objective sought to be achieved, infringing rights more than necessary. |
| Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| Conceptual area | Judiciary & Judicial Review |
| Conceptual area | Separation of Powers & Constitutional Ideals |
| Body | Role |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of India | Exercises judicial review power |
| High Courts | Exercise judicial review power |
Exam lens
Prelims framing, traps & PYQs
For Prelims, UPSC often tests the constitutional articles related to judicial review (13, 32, 226), landmark judgments (Kesavananda Bharati, Minerva Mills), the concept of 'Basic Structure,' and the distinction between judicial review and judicial activism. Questions may also focus on the types of writs and their application.
For Mains, questions delve into the significance of judicial review for democracy, federalism, and fundamental rights. Candidates are expected to analyze its limitations, the debate between judicial activism and restraint, its impact on governance and policy-making, and its role in maintaining checks and balances. Critical evaluation of judicial intervention in policy matters is a common theme.
- Power of courts to examine constitutionality of laws/orders.
- Ensures adherence to the Constitution and rule of law.
- Protects Fundamental Rights from state encroachment.
- Not explicitly mentioned in Constitution but implied from various articles (e.g., 13, 32, 226).
- Forms part of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution.
| Year | Framing tags |
|---|---|
| 2025 | Factual recall, Multi-statement analysis |
| 2025 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2024 | Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions |
| 2023 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
| 2021 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2021 | Conceptual understanding, Institutional roles and functions |
| 2020 | Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding |
| 2019 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2018 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2017 | Conceptual understanding, Definition-based questions |
| 2015 | Institutional roles and functions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2014 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
Latest
Current affairs & evolution
Recent challenges to government policies, such as the CBSE three-language rule for Class 9, highlight the judiciary's ongoing role in scrutinizing executive decisions for legality, constitutionality, and adherence to principles of fairness and public interest, reflecting the dynamic interplay between policy-making and judicial oversight.
The judiciary frequently reviews policy decisions related to education, economic reforms, environmental regulations, social welfare schemes, and administrative appointments. These reviews ensure that policies align with constitutional mandates, statutory provisions, and principles of good governance.
Timeline
-
Judiciary & Judicial Review
Conceptual area
-
Separation of Powers & Constitutional Ideals
Conceptual area
-
Prelims 2014
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2015
Institutional roles and functions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2017
Conceptual understanding, Definition-based questions
-
Prelims 2018
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2019
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2020
Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Conceptual understanding, Institutional roles and functions
-
Prelims 2023
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2024
Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions
-
Prelims 2025
Factual recall, Multi-statement analysis
-
Prelims 2025
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Parents, students challenge CBSE three-language rule for Class 9
The power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality and legality of legislative enactments and executive orders. It ensures that government actions comply with the Constitution and protects fundamental rights.
See also
Dashed boxes: related topics without a notes page yet. Tap a solid box to open notes.
Past papers
2014–2025 · 11 questions
In the news
Parents, students challenge CBSE three-language rule for Class 9
The power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality and legality of legislative enactments and executive orders. It ensures that government actions comply with the Constitution and protects fundamental rights.
Try these PYQs
Consider the following statements :
1. The Parliament of India can place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India.
2. The validity of a law placed in the Ninth Schedule cannot be examined by any court and no judgement can be made on it.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is correct: The Ninth Schedule was introduced through the First Constitutional Amendment (1951) to protect certain laws from judicial review, even if they violated Fundamental Rights (Part III of the Constitution). Statement 2 is incorrect: The protection under the Ninth Schedule is not absolute. As per the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) and reaffirmed in the I.R. Coelho case (2007), laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, can still be challenged if they violate the "Basic Structure" of the Constitution. Thus, while the Ninth Schedule provides a degree of protection, the Supreme Court retains the power to review laws that undermine the Constitution’s core principles. Hence, the correct answer is option (a) 1 only.
With reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:
1. No High Court shall have the jurisdiction to declare any central law to be constitutionally invalid.
2. An amendment to the Constitution of India cannot be called into question by the Supreme Court of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is incorrect. High Courts have the power to declare central laws unconstitutional. This power is derived from their inherent jurisdiction to uphold the Constitution. Statement 2 is incorrect. While the Supreme Court cannot question the amending power of the Parliament, it can review the constitutional validity of an amendment. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala established the doctrine of the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. Any amendment that violates this basic structure can be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Consider the following statements with regard to pardoning power of the President of India:
I. The exercise of this power by the President can be subjected to limited judicial review.
II. The President can exercise this power without the advice of the Council of Ministers.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement I is correct: President’s pardoning power can be subjected to limited judicial review, especially on grounds like mala fides, irrelevant considerations, or arbitrariness (as held in Kehar Singh, Epuru Sudhakar cases). Statement II is incorrect: President cannot act independently; the power must be exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 74.
Consider the following statements:
1. The Constitution of India defines its ‘basic structure’ in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights and democracy.
2. The Constitution of India provides for ‘judicial review’ to safeguard the citizens’ liberties and to preserve the ideals on which the Constitution is based.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is incorrect: The term "basic structure" is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution. It was first propounded by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). The Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368, there are certain features of the Constitution that form its basic structure and cannot be altered or destroyed through amendments by Parliament. Although the basic structure doctrine includes elements such as federalism, secularism, democracy, and fundamental rights, these features are not explicitly listed as the 'basic structure' in the Constitution itself. Statement 2 is incorrect: The Constitution of India does not explicitly mention the power of judicial review. Instead, this power is derived from various provisions, particularly Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions, ensuring they do not violate fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. This power is essential in maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution and protecting citizens' rights. Hence, neither of the statements is correct.
With reference to Indian Judiciary, consider the following statements:
1. Any retired judge of the Supreme Court of India can be called back to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge by the Chief Justice of India with prior permission of the President of India.
2. A High Court in India has the power to review its own judgement as the Supreme Court does.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is correct: Under Article 128, the Chief Justice of India may, at any time, with the previous consent of the President, request a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Judge of a High Court (who is duly qualified) to sit and act as a Judge of the Supreme Court. Statement 2 is not correct: Although there is no explicit Article in the Constitution equivalent to Article 137 (which grants review power to the SC) for High Courts, the High Courts are "Courts of Record" under Article 215. As a Court of Record, a High Court has the inherent power to review its own orders and judgments to correct any patent error or prevent a miscarriage of justice. This has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in various rulings.
Show 7 more PYQs
In India, Judicial Review implies -
The power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders. Judicial Review in India refers to the power of the Judiciary to examine laws and executive actions to ensure they comply with the Constitution of India. This power allows the courts to strike down any law or executive order that is found to be unconstitutional, thereby upholding the supremacy of the Constitution. Judicial Review is an essential feature of the Basic Structure Doctrine, ensuring the protection of fundamental rights and the separation of powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Thus, Judicial Review acts as a safeguard against unconstitutional actions and reinforces the rule of law in India.
In India, which one of the following Constitutional Amendments was widely believed to be enacted to overcome the judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?
* The First Amendment Act, of 1951, added the fourth clause to Article 15 that empowered the government to make any law for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled * Tribes. The added clause elucidates that in case such special provisions are introduced, they cannot be said to be breaching Article 15 and Article 29(2) of the Constitution. * The need to insert this clause was felt after the decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam (1951). According to the facts of this case, the Madras government issued an Order that provided reservation on the grounds of religion, race, and caste. This Order was contended to be in breach of Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution. The Court also gave a literal interpretation to the constitutional provisions and held that reserving seats in public institutions for backward classes violates Articles 15(1) and 29(2). Therefore, to nullify the effect of similar judicial pronouncements, Article 15 was amended. * Similarly, Article 19(1)(a) grants the right to free speech and expression to Indian citizens. This right is considered an essential feature of democracy. However, Article 19(2) specifies the restrictions that can curtail this freedom. The First Amendment to the Indian Constitution altered these restrictions by widening their ambit. The second change, via the Amendment Act of 1951, was made to Clause 6 of Article 19. Note: UPSC deleted this question when the final answer key was issued.
The power of the Supreme Court of India to decide disputes between the Centre and the States falls under its
Article 131 of the Constitution of India provides for the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to settle the disputes between the different units of the Indian Federation such as between the Centre and one or more states and, between the states.
A Writ of Prohibition is an order issued by the Supreme Court or High Courts to :
Writ of Prohibition: * It is a judicial order issued by a higher court (Supreme Court or High Court) to a lower court or tribunal. * It prevents the lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to law. * Purpose: To stop ongoing proceedings in a case where the lower court lacks jurisdiction or violates legal procedures. * Nature: It is preventive, ensuring the lower court does not act unlawfully rather than correcting a wrong decision after it has occurred. * Example: If a tribunal starts hearing a case that legally falls under the jurisdiction of a civil court, the Writ of Prohibition can halt such proceedings. * Comparison with Certiorari: Prohibition is issued before judgment to stop proceedings, whereas Certiorari is issued after judgment to quash orders passed unlawfully.
Who amongst the following are members of the Jury to select the recipient of 'Gandhi Peace Prize'?
I. The President of India
II. The Prime Minister of India
III. The Chief Justice of India
IV. The Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha
Select the correct answer using the code given below.
❌ Statement I: Incorrect
*The President of India is NOT a member of the Jury.* ✅ Statement II: Correct
*The Prime Minister of India is the Chairperson of the Jury.* ✅ Statement III: Correct
*The Chief Justice of India (or a Supreme Court Judge nominated by the CJI) is a Jury member.* ✅ Statement IV: Correct
*The Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha (or leader of largest opposition party) is a Jury member.* Correct Answer: Statements II, III, and IV are correct.
Who/Which of the following is the Custodian of the Constitution of India?
A custodian is a person entrusted with the custody or care of something. - Whenever Fundamental Rights are denied or restricted, it can be challenged in the Supreme Court under Article 32; - The dispute between Centre and State can be settled in the Supreme Court under Article 131; - the Law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all the courts in India under Article 141; - For the enforcement of decrees - Article 142; - President of India consulting Supreme Court under Article 143; - After all, under Article 13, all laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of any of the fundamental rights shall be void ( Doctrine of Judicial Review). - Supreme Court judgments are the law of the land; Based on the above facts, the Supreme Court takes care of the Constitution. So, simply the Supreme Court is the Custodian of the Constitution.
Which one of the following in Indian polity is an essential feature that indicates that it is federal in character?
Option A is correct. In a federal system, power is distributed between the central government and the states. There can be disputes about the division of power or interpretation of the Constitution.
An independent judiciary acts as an impartial umpire to settle these disputes and uphold the Constitution. It ensures that both the central government and the states function within their constitutional boundaries.The other options, while relevant to Indian polity, are not exclusive to federal systems Option B is incorrect. The Union Legislature having elected representatives from constituent units is a common feature in both federal and some unitary states with devolved power. Option C is incorrect. The Union Cabinet having elected representatives from regional parties is not a defining characteristic of federalism. Political party affiliation doesn't necessarily determine the federal structure. Option D is incorrect. The Fundamental Rights being enforceable by Courts of Law, while essential for a democracy, this feature exists even in some non-federal states.