Judicial Review — Basic Structure

Basic Structure

Judicial review is the power of courts, particularly the Supreme Court and High Courts, to examine and determine the constitutional validity of laws and executive actions. Though not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it derives from Articles 13, 32, and 226.

The doctrine operates on three levels: reviewing constitutional amendments (limited by basic structure doctrine), legislative actions (laws passed by Parliament and state legislatures), and administrative actions (executive decisions and policies).

The evolution of judicial review shows distinct phases: initial restraint (Shankari Prasad, 1951), expansion (Golak Nath, 1967), and balance through the basic structure doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973).

Key limitations include the basic structure doctrine, political question doctrine, and principles of judicial restraint. The power serves as a crucial check on legislative and executive authority, protecting fundamental rights and maintaining constitutional supremacy.

Recent developments include review of the Ninth Schedule laws (I.R. Coelho, 2007) and expansion through Public Interest Litigation. Judicial review ensures that no law or action can violate the Constitution's fundamental principles, making the judiciary the final interpreter of constitutional meaning while balancing democratic governance with constitutional values.

Important Differences

vs Judicial Activism

Aspect	This Topic	Judicial Activism
Definition	Power to review constitutional validity of laws and actions	Proactive judicial approach in policy-making and social issues
Constitutional Basis	Articles 13, 32, 226 - explicit constitutional foundation	No specific constitutional provision - judicial interpretation
Scope	Limited to constitutional validity and legal compliance	Extends to policy formulation and social engineering
Approach	Reactive - responds to challenges brought before court	Proactive - court initiates action on social issues
Limitations	Basic structure doctrine, political question doctrine	Separation of powers, democratic accountability concerns

Judicial review is a constitutionally grounded power to examine legal validity, while judicial activism represents a proactive judicial approach to social and policy issues. Judicial review operates within defined constitutional parameters, whereas judicial activism often ventures into policy domains traditionally reserved for legislature and executive. Both concepts intersect when courts use review powers actively to address social issues, but they serve different constitutional functions - review ensures constitutional compliance while activism drives social change through judicial intervention.

vs Legislative Review

Aspect	This Topic	Legislative Review
Authority	Exercised by judiciary (Supreme Court and High Courts)	Exercised by legislature (Parliament and state legislatures)
Standard	Constitutional validity and legal compliance	Policy effectiveness and political considerations
Binding Nature	Legally binding decisions with constitutional force	Political accountability through democratic process
Scope	Limited to legal and constitutional questions	Comprehensive review of policies and administration
Remedy	Declaration of invalidity, writs, constitutional interpretation	Policy changes, budget allocations, legislative amendments

Judicial review focuses on constitutional and legal validity of government actions, while legislative review examines policy effectiveness and administrative performance. Judicial review provides legal remedies through constitutional interpretation, whereas legislative review offers political remedies through democratic accountability. Both serve as checks on executive power but operate through different mechanisms - judicial review through legal standards and legislative review through political oversight. The two systems complement each other in ensuring comprehensive accountability in democratic governance.

Also build Paper II skills

Dense constitutional and IR passages mirror CSAT-style comprehension and argument evaluation—build those skills in parallel. CSAT hub.

• Valid & invalid arguments
• Syllogisms
• Critical reasoning