Judicial Review of Executive/Policy Decisions

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.

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).

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.

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.