Judicial review is a process under which executive or legislative actions are subject to review by the judiciary. Judicial Review plays an important role in Indian Judiciary.
This document discusses delegated legislation, also known as subordinate or subsidiary legislation. It begins by explaining that delegated legislation refers to laws made by persons or bodies to whom Parliament has delegated law-making authority. Principal Acts of Parliament can enable subsidiary legislation and specify who has the power to make it. Delegated legislation allows administrative details to be implemented that ensure Acts will operate successfully.
The document then covers types of delegated legislation like regulations, statutory rules, by-laws and ordinances. It discusses the rationale for delegated legislation, including saving parliamentary time and dealing with technical or rapidly changing issues. The institutions and authorities that can make delegated legislation are also outlined, along with controls like parliamentary and judicial scrutiny.
This document provides an overview of delegated legislation in India. It defines delegated legislation as the exercise of legislative power by an agent who is lower in rank or subordinate to the legislative body. The document discusses the history and types of delegated legislation under the Indian constitution. It outlines cases that illustrate judicial control over delegated legislation and analyzes the effectiveness of parliamentary control. The document also discusses advantages and criticisms of the practice of delegated legislation in India.
This document summarizes the different types of writs available under the Indian Constitution. It discusses writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo-warranto.
Habeas corpus allows a court to order a detaining authority to produce an arrested person to examine if their detention is lawful. Mandamus is an order commanding a public official to perform their official duty. Prohibition, also called a 'stay order', stops lower courts from exceeding their jurisdiction. Certiorari allows higher courts to review decisions of lower courts for legal errors. Quo-warranto challenges a person's authority to hold public office.
This document discusses center-state relations in India based on the country's federal system. It covers three key areas: legislative relations, administrative relations, and financial relations between the central and state governments as outlined in the Indian constitution. For legislative relations, it describes the division of lawmaking powers between the union/central parliament and state legislatures. For administrative relations, it discusses techniques of central control over states and mechanisms for inter-state coordination. For financial relations, it outlines the allocation of tax revenues and financial resources between the center and states.
This document discusses the concept of judicial review in India. It defines judicial review as the power of courts to review laws enacted by the legislature and declare them unconstitutional. It outlines that judicial review originated in the US and was later incorporated into the Indian constitution. The document discusses important cases where judicial review was exercised in India and explains that the power helps maintain the balance of federalism and protect fundamental rights. It also lists the relevant constitutional provisions and scope of judicial review in India.
Rule of Law is important topic for all entrance examination. Here we comparison of Rule of Law in India with U.S.A & England. It is very useful all law students.
The document discusses the amendment process of the Constitution of India as outlined in Article 368. It provides that amendments can be initiated by introduction of a bill in either house of Parliament. The bill must be passed by a special majority in each house and receive presidential assent. Some provisions also require ratification by half the state legislatures. The Supreme Court has ruled that amendments cannot alter the basic structure of the constitution. The document outlines the different classes of amendments and criticisms of the current process. It examines the scope of amendability and summarizes some major constitutional amendments that have been passed.
This document discusses delegated legislation, also known as subordinate or subsidiary legislation. It begins by explaining that delegated legislation refers to laws made by persons or bodies to whom Parliament has delegated law-making authority. Principal Acts of Parliament can enable subsidiary legislation and specify who has the power to make it. Delegated legislation allows administrative details to be implemented that ensure Acts will operate successfully.
The document then covers types of delegated legislation like regulations, statutory rules, by-laws and ordinances. It discusses the rationale for delegated legislation, including saving parliamentary time and dealing with technical or rapidly changing issues. The institutions and authorities that can make delegated legislation are also outlined, along with controls like parliamentary and judicial scrutiny.
This document provides an overview of delegated legislation in India. It defines delegated legislation as the exercise of legislative power by an agent who is lower in rank or subordinate to the legislative body. The document discusses the history and types of delegated legislation under the Indian constitution. It outlines cases that illustrate judicial control over delegated legislation and analyzes the effectiveness of parliamentary control. The document also discusses advantages and criticisms of the practice of delegated legislation in India.
This document summarizes the different types of writs available under the Indian Constitution. It discusses writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo-warranto.
Habeas corpus allows a court to order a detaining authority to produce an arrested person to examine if their detention is lawful. Mandamus is an order commanding a public official to perform their official duty. Prohibition, also called a 'stay order', stops lower courts from exceeding their jurisdiction. Certiorari allows higher courts to review decisions of lower courts for legal errors. Quo-warranto challenges a person's authority to hold public office.
This document discusses center-state relations in India based on the country's federal system. It covers three key areas: legislative relations, administrative relations, and financial relations between the central and state governments as outlined in the Indian constitution. For legislative relations, it describes the division of lawmaking powers between the union/central parliament and state legislatures. For administrative relations, it discusses techniques of central control over states and mechanisms for inter-state coordination. For financial relations, it outlines the allocation of tax revenues and financial resources between the center and states.
This document discusses the concept of judicial review in India. It defines judicial review as the power of courts to review laws enacted by the legislature and declare them unconstitutional. It outlines that judicial review originated in the US and was later incorporated into the Indian constitution. The document discusses important cases where judicial review was exercised in India and explains that the power helps maintain the balance of federalism and protect fundamental rights. It also lists the relevant constitutional provisions and scope of judicial review in India.
Rule of Law is important topic for all entrance examination. Here we comparison of Rule of Law in India with U.S.A & England. It is very useful all law students.
The document discusses the amendment process of the Constitution of India as outlined in Article 368. It provides that amendments can be initiated by introduction of a bill in either house of Parliament. The bill must be passed by a special majority in each house and receive presidential assent. Some provisions also require ratification by half the state legislatures. The Supreme Court has ruled that amendments cannot alter the basic structure of the constitution. The document outlines the different classes of amendments and criticisms of the current process. It examines the scope of amendability and summarizes some major constitutional amendments that have been passed.
Emergency provision under Indian constitution gagan deep
The document discusses different types of emergencies that can be declared under the Indian Constitution: national emergency, state emergency, and financial emergency.
A national emergency can be declared if the security of India is threatened by war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. It allows the central government to assume more powers. A state emergency can be imposed if a state's government can no longer function properly. It transfers state powers to the central government. A financial emergency is declared if India's financial stability is endangered. It also concentrates powers with the central government to address the situation.
Basic Structure Doctrine of Indian ConstitutionAngelina Naorem
The basic structure doctrine is a judge-made doctrine that limits the amending powers of the Indian Parliament. According to this doctrine, certain features of the Indian Constitution are part of its basic structure and cannot be altered even through constitutional amendments. The doctrine emerged from the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973, where the Supreme Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, it cannot change its basic structure or framework. The basic structure includes features like democracy, secularism, separation of powers, and judicial review. The doctrine was established to balance parliamentary sovereignty with protecting the basic foundations of the Indian Constitution.
There are three main types of delegated legislation: bylaws made by local councils, statutory instruments made by government departments, and Orders in Council made by the Privy Council. Parliament delegates some of its lawmaking power through enabling acts because it does not have time or expertise to pass all necessary laws itself. Delegated legislation is subject to general supervision through the enabling act and requirement for consultation, publication, and parliamentary and court oversight through judicial review. It allows laws to be made more quickly and flexibly by experts but is also criticized as being undemocratic with reduced transparency and scrutiny compared to laws passed by Parliament.
Judicial review refers to the process by which courts exercise control over the findings and interpretations of governmental agencies. It is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but was established in Marbury v. Madison. Judicial review allows courts to determine the meaning of legislation and invalidate unconstitutional statutes. It provides guidance to agencies and acts as a check on administrative overreach. There are two major aspects - access to review, governed by concepts like ripeness, standing, and mootness, and the scope of review, regarding how much deference courts give to agency actions.
The President of India is the ceremonial head of state, while the real executive power is vested in the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The President is elected indirectly by an electoral college for a 5-year term, and can be re-elected. The Prime Minister is appointed by the President and exercises executive powers along with other ministers. Key responsibilities of the Prime Minister include forming the Council of Ministers, distributing portfolios, advising the President, coordinating policies, and leading the majority party in Parliament.
This document summarizes John Austin's analytical positivism school of jurisprudence. It outlines that Austin viewed law as the command of the sovereign, with three key aspects: 1) commands are general rules for a community backed by sanctions, 2) a sovereign is the ultimate human source of law, and 3) law and morality are separate, with law defined by its coercive power rather than moral content. The document also notes chief legal philosophers of this school and some criticisms of Austin's theory.
This document provides an overview and summary of key principles for interpreting statutes. It begins with an introduction to statutory interpretation and discusses literal and logical interpretation approaches. It then covers various internal aids to interpretation like context, title, preamble, headings, and definitions. Exceptions to literal interpretation like ambiguity and absurdity are also noted. The document aims to enable law students' understanding of interpreting statutes.
This document discusses the origins and significance of judicial review in the United States. It begins by outlining the debate around judicial independence during the ratification period. It then explains how judicial review was established through the Federalist Papers and the landmark case Marbury v. Madison, where the Supreme Court first asserted its power to strike down unconstitutional laws. The document discusses the ongoing controversy around judicial review and accusations of "judicial activism." However, it notes that the courts are still subject to checks and balances through other branches of government.
The Constitution can be amended to change or add to it through the amendment process. An amendment must be proposed by two-thirds of Congress or through a convention called for by two-thirds of the states, and then ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures. There have been 27 amendments to the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights which protects civil liberties, and other important amendments dealing with slavery, citizenship rights, voting rights, and privacy.
The document discusses the establishment of the Federal Court of India in 1935. It notes that Sir Hari Singh Gour advocated for an Indian court of final appeal to replace appeals to the British Privy Council. The Government of India Act of 1935 created the Federal Court and defined its jurisdiction over constitutional matters, with authority over all other courts in British India. The Court was inaugurated in 1937 with its first judges and had original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction as defined in the Act.
The document discusses the rule of law in India. It defines the rule of law and outlines A.V. Dicey's three postulates: supremacy of law, equality before the law, and predominance of legal spirit. It examines how the rule of law is reflected in the Indian constitution through fundamental rights, judicial independence, and judicial review. Several Supreme Court cases have upheld the rule of law as a basic feature of the constitution. In conclusion, while not expressly mentioned, the rule of law governs India as a fundamental principle of constitutional governance.
The document discusses the structure and jurisdiction of India's high courts and subordinate courts. It notes that each state has a high court headed by a chief justice. High court judges must be citizens of India under 62 years old with 10 years of experience as a judge or advocate. High courts have original, appellate, advisory, revisory, and judicial review powers. Subordinate courts operate at the district level and include civil, criminal, and revenue courts. Lok Adalats provide inexpensive justice through informal dispute resolution.
The document discusses the concept of possession under jurisprudence. It defines possession as physical control over an object combined with the intention to exercise that control. There are two essential elements of possession: corpus (physical power over the object) and animus (intention to exclude others). Possession can be classified as corporeal or incorporeal, mediate or immediate, de facto or de jure, and constructive or adverse. The document also discusses definitions of possession provided by various jurists and analyzes the 1851 case Bridges v. Hawkesworth regarding the rule of finders-keepers.
This document discusses administrative tribunals in India. It defines tribunals and distinguishes them from courts and executive authorities. Tribunals were established to handle the growing workload of courts due to expanded government functions. While tribunals have some court-like qualities, they are not bound by strict rules of evidence and procedure. The document outlines the constitutional provisions related to tribunals, their powers and limitations, as well as recommendations from committees on improving their structure and functions.
The document discusses key provisions regarding High Courts in India according to Articles 214 to 231 of the Constitution. It outlines that High Courts are headed by a Chief Justice and other judges appointed by the President. High Court judges must be citizens of India, advocates of at least 10 years, and will serve until age 62. They can be removed by the President based on an address by both houses of Parliament. High Courts have powers to issue writs throughout their territorial jurisdiction and supervise all lower courts. Certain cases may be transferred to the High Court if they involve substantial questions of constitutional law. It also distinguishes between the Attorney General of India and Advocate Generals of States in terms of their appointment and roles.
Judicial review is the power of the courts to determine the constitutionality
Of legislative acts in a case instituted by aggrieved person.
It is the power of the court to declare a legislative act on the grounds
of Unconstitutionality.
People and entities seek judicial review to obtain remedy from an agency decision if they feel they have been injured.
Judicial review is an example of separation of powers in a modern government system( where judiciary is one of the branches of government).
The Supreme Court of India enjoys several important powers and functions according to the constitution:
1. It acts as the interpreter of the Constitution and its decisions are final on questions of law, allowing it to invalidate laws and executive actions that are unconstitutional.
2. As the guardian of the constitution, the Supreme Court protects fundamental rights and ensures justice.
3. However, its independence was undermined during the Indian Emergency of 1975-1976 when constitutional rights were restricted. The judiciary is meant to act as a check on the executive.
Emergency provision under Indian constitution gagan deep
The document discusses different types of emergencies that can be declared under the Indian Constitution: national emergency, state emergency, and financial emergency.
A national emergency can be declared if the security of India is threatened by war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. It allows the central government to assume more powers. A state emergency can be imposed if a state's government can no longer function properly. It transfers state powers to the central government. A financial emergency is declared if India's financial stability is endangered. It also concentrates powers with the central government to address the situation.
Basic Structure Doctrine of Indian ConstitutionAngelina Naorem
The basic structure doctrine is a judge-made doctrine that limits the amending powers of the Indian Parliament. According to this doctrine, certain features of the Indian Constitution are part of its basic structure and cannot be altered even through constitutional amendments. The doctrine emerged from the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973, where the Supreme Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, it cannot change its basic structure or framework. The basic structure includes features like democracy, secularism, separation of powers, and judicial review. The doctrine was established to balance parliamentary sovereignty with protecting the basic foundations of the Indian Constitution.
There are three main types of delegated legislation: bylaws made by local councils, statutory instruments made by government departments, and Orders in Council made by the Privy Council. Parliament delegates some of its lawmaking power through enabling acts because it does not have time or expertise to pass all necessary laws itself. Delegated legislation is subject to general supervision through the enabling act and requirement for consultation, publication, and parliamentary and court oversight through judicial review. It allows laws to be made more quickly and flexibly by experts but is also criticized as being undemocratic with reduced transparency and scrutiny compared to laws passed by Parliament.
Judicial review refers to the process by which courts exercise control over the findings and interpretations of governmental agencies. It is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but was established in Marbury v. Madison. Judicial review allows courts to determine the meaning of legislation and invalidate unconstitutional statutes. It provides guidance to agencies and acts as a check on administrative overreach. There are two major aspects - access to review, governed by concepts like ripeness, standing, and mootness, and the scope of review, regarding how much deference courts give to agency actions.
The President of India is the ceremonial head of state, while the real executive power is vested in the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The President is elected indirectly by an electoral college for a 5-year term, and can be re-elected. The Prime Minister is appointed by the President and exercises executive powers along with other ministers. Key responsibilities of the Prime Minister include forming the Council of Ministers, distributing portfolios, advising the President, coordinating policies, and leading the majority party in Parliament.
This document summarizes John Austin's analytical positivism school of jurisprudence. It outlines that Austin viewed law as the command of the sovereign, with three key aspects: 1) commands are general rules for a community backed by sanctions, 2) a sovereign is the ultimate human source of law, and 3) law and morality are separate, with law defined by its coercive power rather than moral content. The document also notes chief legal philosophers of this school and some criticisms of Austin's theory.
This document provides an overview and summary of key principles for interpreting statutes. It begins with an introduction to statutory interpretation and discusses literal and logical interpretation approaches. It then covers various internal aids to interpretation like context, title, preamble, headings, and definitions. Exceptions to literal interpretation like ambiguity and absurdity are also noted. The document aims to enable law students' understanding of interpreting statutes.
This document discusses the origins and significance of judicial review in the United States. It begins by outlining the debate around judicial independence during the ratification period. It then explains how judicial review was established through the Federalist Papers and the landmark case Marbury v. Madison, where the Supreme Court first asserted its power to strike down unconstitutional laws. The document discusses the ongoing controversy around judicial review and accusations of "judicial activism." However, it notes that the courts are still subject to checks and balances through other branches of government.
The Constitution can be amended to change or add to it through the amendment process. An amendment must be proposed by two-thirds of Congress or through a convention called for by two-thirds of the states, and then ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures. There have been 27 amendments to the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights which protects civil liberties, and other important amendments dealing with slavery, citizenship rights, voting rights, and privacy.
The document discusses the establishment of the Federal Court of India in 1935. It notes that Sir Hari Singh Gour advocated for an Indian court of final appeal to replace appeals to the British Privy Council. The Government of India Act of 1935 created the Federal Court and defined its jurisdiction over constitutional matters, with authority over all other courts in British India. The Court was inaugurated in 1937 with its first judges and had original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction as defined in the Act.
The document discusses the rule of law in India. It defines the rule of law and outlines A.V. Dicey's three postulates: supremacy of law, equality before the law, and predominance of legal spirit. It examines how the rule of law is reflected in the Indian constitution through fundamental rights, judicial independence, and judicial review. Several Supreme Court cases have upheld the rule of law as a basic feature of the constitution. In conclusion, while not expressly mentioned, the rule of law governs India as a fundamental principle of constitutional governance.
The document discusses the structure and jurisdiction of India's high courts and subordinate courts. It notes that each state has a high court headed by a chief justice. High court judges must be citizens of India under 62 years old with 10 years of experience as a judge or advocate. High courts have original, appellate, advisory, revisory, and judicial review powers. Subordinate courts operate at the district level and include civil, criminal, and revenue courts. Lok Adalats provide inexpensive justice through informal dispute resolution.
The document discusses the concept of possession under jurisprudence. It defines possession as physical control over an object combined with the intention to exercise that control. There are two essential elements of possession: corpus (physical power over the object) and animus (intention to exclude others). Possession can be classified as corporeal or incorporeal, mediate or immediate, de facto or de jure, and constructive or adverse. The document also discusses definitions of possession provided by various jurists and analyzes the 1851 case Bridges v. Hawkesworth regarding the rule of finders-keepers.
This document discusses administrative tribunals in India. It defines tribunals and distinguishes them from courts and executive authorities. Tribunals were established to handle the growing workload of courts due to expanded government functions. While tribunals have some court-like qualities, they are not bound by strict rules of evidence and procedure. The document outlines the constitutional provisions related to tribunals, their powers and limitations, as well as recommendations from committees on improving their structure and functions.
The document discusses key provisions regarding High Courts in India according to Articles 214 to 231 of the Constitution. It outlines that High Courts are headed by a Chief Justice and other judges appointed by the President. High Court judges must be citizens of India, advocates of at least 10 years, and will serve until age 62. They can be removed by the President based on an address by both houses of Parliament. High Courts have powers to issue writs throughout their territorial jurisdiction and supervise all lower courts. Certain cases may be transferred to the High Court if they involve substantial questions of constitutional law. It also distinguishes between the Attorney General of India and Advocate Generals of States in terms of their appointment and roles.
Judicial review is the power of the courts to determine the constitutionality
Of legislative acts in a case instituted by aggrieved person.
It is the power of the court to declare a legislative act on the grounds
of Unconstitutionality.
People and entities seek judicial review to obtain remedy from an agency decision if they feel they have been injured.
Judicial review is an example of separation of powers in a modern government system( where judiciary is one of the branches of government).
The Supreme Court of India enjoys several important powers and functions according to the constitution:
1. It acts as the interpreter of the Constitution and its decisions are final on questions of law, allowing it to invalidate laws and executive actions that are unconstitutional.
2. As the guardian of the constitution, the Supreme Court protects fundamental rights and ensures justice.
3. However, its independence was undermined during the Indian Emergency of 1975-1976 when constitutional rights were restricted. The judiciary is meant to act as a check on the executive.
The judiciary plays both legal and political roles in India. As the document outlines, the Supreme Court has independence, security of tenure for judges, financial independence from other branches of government, and immunity from criticism to ensure it can perform its duties without fear or favor. The Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction over legal cases. It also protects fundamental rights and can strike down unconstitutional laws.
The document discusses the doctrine of separation of powers in the United States and India. In the US, legislative power is vested in Congress, executive power in the President, and judicial power in the Supreme Court and federal courts. In India, there is a broad separation of powers with the executive, legislature, and judiciary each having their own spheres, but some overlap is permitted. The judiciary plays a key role in upholding the rule of law and constitution in both countries.
The document discusses the history and establishment of the Supreme Court of India. It was established through enactments passed in pre-independent India and is now the highest court and final court of appeal in India. The document outlines the key powers and functions of the Supreme Court, including judicial review, appellate jurisdiction, and acting as the guardian of the Indian Constitution. It also discusses the procedure for impeachment of Supreme Court judges.
The document summarizes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts in India. It discusses that the Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction to hear disputes between central and state governments, challenges to high court rulings, and can provide advice to the president. It also has writ jurisdiction to protect fundamental rights. The High Courts have original jurisdiction over some state-level cases and writ jurisdiction. They also have supervisory powers over lower courts, power of judicial review over state laws and executive orders, and appellate jurisdiction over lower court rulings. The document provides details on the different types of jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court and High Courts in India.
The judicial system in India has a single integrated structure with the Supreme Court at the apex, High Courts at the state level, and district courts at the local level. It also provides for an independent and powerful judiciary to act as guardian of the Constitution. The Supreme Court currently has 29 judges including the Chief Justice, who is currently Justice Uday Umesh Lalit but will soon be replaced by Justice Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud. The Supreme Court has original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction and its decisions have binding precedent. Below the High Courts are subordinate courts that deal with various cases. India has a separation of powers between the judiciary, executive, and legislature to maintain independence of the courts.
The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority in the country. It consists of a Chief Justice and 30 other judges appointed by the President. The Constitution ensures the independence of Supreme Court judges in several ways, such as judges can only be removed via impeachment. The Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction. It acts as the guardian of the Constitution and protector of fundamental rights.
The judiciary in India has a hierarchical structure of courts with the Supreme Court at the top, followed by High Courts in each state and union territory. Below the High Courts are district courts and subordinate courts that handle civil and criminal cases. The Supreme Court has original and appellate jurisdiction and ensures the independence of the judiciary from the legislature and executive. Key functions of the Indian judiciary include upholding the constitution, resolving disputes, protecting fundamental rights, assisting in lawmaking, and interpreting laws.
The document provides information on the Indian judiciary system, including its hierarchy and evolution. It discusses the following key points:
1) The Indian judiciary system is hierarchical, with the Supreme Court at the top, followed by High Courts, and then District Courts and subordinate courts.
2) The evolution of the Indian judiciary can be classified into four phases - from a textual approach to a more structuralist one, then dealing with increased heterogeneity, and most recently pursuing social transformation.
3) The document outlines the key functions and powers of the different levels of courts, including their original and appellate jurisdiction. It provides details on the establishment and jurisdiction of High Courts across various states in India.
Role of Judiciary In Strengthening Democracy in IndiaIshan Bhavsar
Role of Judiciary In Strengthening Democracy in India.
Deals with how the independent Indian Judiciary has helped maintain a democratic state as vast & mighty and culturally different as India all together as a single nation.
Grade 10 Civics Project, made by Ishan Ketan Bhavsar
Copyright (c) 2021-2022 Ishan Ketan Bhavsar
TO BE USED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
The Supreme Court of India is the highest court in the country. It has original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction. It hears appeals from high courts and disputes between the central government and states or between states. The Chief Justice and other judges are appointed by the President. The Supreme Court ensures the independence of the judiciary and protects fundamental rights through writ jurisdiction. It can punish for contempt of court.
judicial reviews and judicial activism.pptxSrujanSd
Judicial review allows the judiciary to review the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. It is considered a basic structure of the independent judiciary in India. Judicial review can be of three types: legislative actions, judicial decisions, and administrative actions. The judiciary acts as a custodian of fundamental rights and ensures that the balance of power is maintained between different branches of government. While judicial review determines if a law is aligned with the constitution, judicial activism involves judges allowing personal views to influence decisions more than constitutional principles.
Is the Rule of Law is ensured in our Country or not?A K DAS's | Law
The document discusses whether the rule of law is ensured in Bangladesh. It defines the rule of law as a structure that protects citizens' rights from arbitrary government power through principles like supremacy of law, equality before the law, and ordinary law overriding the constitution. While rule of law is a basic principle in Bangladesh's constitution, in practice laws are not always implemented for citizens' welfare and rule of law is not fully ensured. The constitution contains provisions supporting rule of law, but separation of powers is not fully realized and law enforcement agencies do not respect human rights. Corruption also limits access to justice. In conclusion, while rule of law provisions exist, it is only partly ensured in practical implementation.
The document discusses the structure and powers of the Supreme Court of India according to the country's constitution. It notes that the Supreme Court is the highest judicial court with powers of judicial review. It has original jurisdiction over disputes between states and between the central government and states, and appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals from lower courts. It can issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights and decides cases involving the interpretation of the constitution.
The document discusses the organization and powers of the Supreme Court of India. It notes that the Supreme Court was established on January 28, 1950 to replace the Federal Court of India. It currently has 31 judges, including the Chief Justice, up from an original number of 8. Judges are appointed by the President after consultation. The Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction over disputes. It also has powers of judicial review to examine the constitutionality of laws and acts.
Recently there was a controversy over the transfer of the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, Justice Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani, to the Meghalaya High Court. Justice Tahilramani submitted her resignation after her request for reconsideration of the transfer was rejected by the Collegium headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI), Ranjan Gogoi, and four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
The document discusses the independence of the judiciary in India. It begins by explaining that an independent judiciary is essential to India's democratic system. However, the independence of the judiciary has been challenged at times by external political influence. The document then examines several Indian court cases where the independence of the judiciary was called into question. It analyzes constitutional provisions regarding an independent judiciary. Finally, the document considers whether recent events indicate that India's judicial independence may be at risk and suggests potential reforms.
The document discusses the structure and functions of the judiciary in India. It describes the following key points:
- The Supreme Court of India is the highest court with original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction. It currently has 25 judges.
- High Courts exist for each state and have appellate jurisdiction over lower courts.
- The judiciary upholds fundamental rights and can declare laws unconstitutional.
- The Supreme Court has powers to issue writs, hear appeals, give advisory opinions to the President, and set precedents for lower courts.
- Judicial appointments are made through a political process but judges have security of tenure.
The document discusses various constitutional provisions relating to environmental law in India. It covers:
1) Fundamental rights like right to life, personal liberty, equality and free speech have been interpreted by courts to include right to clean environment.
2) Directive principles of state policy require the state to protect and improve environment.
3) 42nd amendment added protection of environment as a fundamental duty of citizens.
4) Environmental laws are made using entries from the union, state and concurrent lists to regulate issues like forests, fisheries, rivers etc.
5) Important cases where courts expanded right to life and directed relocation of polluting industries in Taj Trapezium zone and closure of tanneries.
DescriptionThe Supreme Court of India is the premier judicial court under the Constitution of India. It is the highest constitutional court and has the power of judicial review.
Judicial activism in India ( Brief Notes )sandhyakrish2
1. Judicial activism in India refers to the judiciary taking an active role in upholding constitutional rights and reviewing laws to ensure they are beneficial to citizens.
2. It empowers courts to strike down laws that infringe on fundamental rights or contradict constitutional values.
3. Public interest litigation introduced in the 1970s expanded judicial activism by allowing citizens to file petitions on public issues. This led to important rulings on environmental protection, human rights, and more.
India offers astounding variety in virtually every aspect of social life. Indian society is multifaceted to an extent perhaps unknown in any other of the world's great civilizations.
Facts about directive principles of state policy (Brief Notes)sandhyakrish2
The Directive Principles of State Policy of India are the guidelines or 15 principles given to the federal institutes governing the State of India, to be kept in citation while framing laws and policies.
For Hindus, marriage is a sacrosanct union. It is also an important social institution. Marriages in India are between two families, rather two individuals. The society as well as the Indian legislation attempt to protect marriage.
Basic laws everyone should know as an Indian Citizensandhyakrish2
Indian Constitution has provided several rights to the people to protect their fundamental rights, but unfortunately, most people are not aware of their rights.
The Supreme Court of India is the premier judicial court under the Constitution of India. It is the highest constitutional court, and has the power of judicial review.
This document discusses public interest litigation (PIL) in India. PIL allows individuals or organizations to file lawsuits in court to protect public interests. It aims to provide legal representation for underrepresented groups like the poor, minorities, and those advocating for environmental protection. Notable early PIL cases helped release thousands of under-trial prisoners and established the right to speedy justice. Later PIL cases addressed issues like bonded labor, worker exploitation, pollution, and sexual harassment. PIL has helped protect people's fundamental rights and forced the government to better uphold its constitutional obligations.
Emergency Provisions are contained in Part Eighteen of the Constitution of India. The President has the power to impose emergency in all part of India if any security fails.
Regarding the property division after a divorce, California follows the community property laws. This implies that all the property that is accumulated during the marriage, including all debts, is considered the property of both and is likely to be split in the middle. Dive into ppt to know several factors can influence who gets the house in a divorce in California.
Anti-Money Laundering (AML): What It Is, Its History, and How It Works
What Is Anti-Money Laundering (AML)?
Anti-money laundering is an international web of laws, regulations, and procedures aimed at uncovering money that has been disguised as legitimate income. For centuries, governments and law enforcement agencies have tried to fight crime by following the money. In modern times, that comes down to anti-money laundering (AML) laws and activities.
Money laundering is the concealment of the origins of money gained from crimes, including tax evasion, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and public corruption. It also includes money being illegally routed to terrorist organizations.1
Anti-money laundering regulations have had an impact on governments, financial institutions, and even individuals around the world.
2. Judicial Review refers to the powers of the
judiciary to interpret the Constitution and to
declare any such law or order of legislative
Executive void.
If it finds the conflict, constitution ( Supreme Law
Of Land).
The Supreme Court of India has the right and
supreme responsibility of interpreting and
protecting it.
It also protects the Fundamental Rights of
people.
3. For this purpose, the Supreme Court exercises the
power of determining the Constitution.
The validity of all laws. It has the power to reject
any law or any of its power, which is found to be
unconstitutional.
This power of the Supreme Court called the
Judicial Review Power.
State High Court also exercises this power but
their judgments can be rejected or modified or
upheld by the Supreme Court.
4. MEANING OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
Judicial Review refers to the power of the judiciary to
intercept the constitution and to declare any such law
or order of the legislature and executive void.
If it finds the conflict in the Constitution Of India.
Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary in which
the court reviews the law and rules of legislature
executive in cases that come before them in a
litigation case. Then the court determines the
Constitution value with the laws and rules of the
government. And the court rejects the law any of its
power which is found to be unconstitutional or
against the constitution.
5. FEATURES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
IN INDIA:
1. Judicial Review is used by both Supreme
Court & High Court. Both Supreme Court & High
Court exercise the Judicial Review. But the final
power to determine the constitutional validity of
any laws is the hand of the Supreme Court of
India.
2. Judicial Review of both Central & State Laws.
Judicial Review can be conducted in respect of all
central and state laws. The order & ordinance of
executive and constitutional amendments.
6. 3. Limitations: Judicial Review is conducted in
respect of laws, incorporated in the 9th schedule
of the Constitution Of India.
4. It covers laws & not political issues. Judicial
Review applies only to the question of law. It
cannot be exercised in political issues.
5. Judicial Review is not automatic. The
Supreme Court does not use the power of
Judicial Power of its own. It can use it only any
law or rule is specifically challenged before it or
when during hearing the case. The validity of any
law is challenged before it.
7. 6. Decisions in Judicial Review. The Supreme Court
can decide who is constitutionally valid. In this case,
the law continues to operate before or whether the
law is constitutionally invalid. In this case, the law
ceases to affect judgment. only a part or part of it is
invalid. Invalid- not operative & other parts are
operative.
7. Judicial Review decisions get implemented from
the date of judgment. When the law gets rejected
unconstitutional it ceases to operate from the date of
judgment. All activity performed on the basis of law
before the date of the judgment declaring it invalid or
continuing it to be valid.
8. 8. Principle of Procedure established by Law.
Judicial Review in India is governed by the
principle of procedure established by law. The
court conducts one test, whether the law has been
made in accordance with powers granted by the
constitution to the law-making body & follows the
prescribed procedure or not. It gets rejected when
it is violative of procedure established by law.
9. Clarification of Law when rejected law violates.
While declaring a law unconstitutional. The
Supreme Court has to sign the provisions of the
Constitution which it violates. The court has to
clearly establish the invalidity of concern law or
any of its parts.
9. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF JUDICIAL
REVIEW.
1. It is undemocratic. The critics describe
Judicial Review as an undemocratic system. It
empowers the court to decide the fate of laws
passed by the legislative which represents the
sovereign will of the people.
2. Lack of Clarity. The Constitution Of India
does not clearly describe the Judicial Review. It
pressed upon the basis of several articles of the
constitution.
10. 3. Source of the administration problems.
When the law is struck down by the Supreme
Court as unconstitutional. The decision
becomes effective from the date on which
judgment is given.
Now a law can face Judicial Review only
when the question of constitutionality arises in
any case being heard by the Supreme Court.
Such a case can come before the Supreme
Court after 5 or 10 more years in the
enforcement of that law.
11. Court rejects it unconstitutional creates
administration problems.
In Judicial Review decisions can create more
problems than it shows several critics regard the
Judicial Review system as a reactionary system.
They hold while determining the constitutional
validity of the law, the Supreme Court asks and
adopts the legal and conservative approach.
It can reject progressive laws enacted by the
legislature
12. 4. Delaying System: Judicial Review is delay and
inefficiency. The people in general and law
enforcement agencies in particular sometimes
decide to those laws. They prefer to wait to let the
Supreme Court decide the constitution. Validity in a
case that comes before it at any time.
5. Judicial Review can make the parliament
irresponsible as it can decide to depend upon the
Supreme Court for determining the constitution's
validity or reasonableness of law passed by it.
13. 6. Fear of Judicial Tyranny. A bench that can be
3/5/9 Judges of Supreme Court hears the Judicial
Case. It gives a decision by a simple majority of a
single judge. This way single judge determining
the fate of a law that has been passed by elected
members of sovereign people.
7. Supreme Court reverses its decision. The
judgment in the Golaknath case and in the earlier
case like Kesavananda Bharathi case reversed
the judgment in the Golaknath case. The same
enactment was held valid, then invalid and then
valid. Such reversal let to subjective in Supreme
Court.
14. JUSTIFICATION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
Judicial Review does not accept critics.
They argue that Judicial Review is an essential
system in India.
It plays a protective role in the Indian Judiciary
system.
Judicial Review checking the possible corrections.
Judicial Review is a device for protecting the rights
of people.
Judicial power to the judiciary strengthens the
judiciary.
15. Independence to judiciary Judicial Review is
not possible on some law.
9th schedule of the Constitution Of India.
Judicial Review in legal and constitution cases.
Judicial Review is under the Constitution Of
India.
The parliament can pass laws for hurdles in
Judicial Review.
雅虎竞拍
煤炉代买
paypay商城
乐天二手
日本亚马逊
乐天新品
ZOZOTOWN
