RESERVATION PLICIES FOR WEAKER SECTION ENACTED BY THE GOVERNEMNT IN CONTEXT OF JUDICIARY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/z182w305Keywords:
Judicial,, Review,, Law, PowerAbstract
The judges in India have fortunately a most potent judicial power in their hands, namely, the power of judicial review1. In democratic countries, the judiciary is given a place of great significance. The primary function of the courts is to settle disputes and dispense justice between one citizen and another, but courts also resolve disputes between one citizen and the state and the various organs of the state itself.
In many countries with written constitution, there prevails the doctrine of judicial review. It means that the constitution is the supreme law of the land and any law inconsistent there with is void. In this way the judiciary function not only to interpret constitution, but also uphold constitution. So, it has power of judicial review. The courts act as the protector and guardian of the supremacy of the constitution by keeping all authorities legislative, executive, administrative, judicial, or quasi-within legal bounds.
Downloads
References
1. Tiruchelvam and Coomaraswamy, Role of Judiciary in Plural Societies (1987) p.20
2. Sircar, Virendra Kumar, “Law Declared by the Supreme Court of India” AIR 1962 (J) p.113
3. Ray S.N. “Judicial Review and Fundamental Rights” 1974 p.14.
4. Sharan,P., “ Judicial Review in Various Countries”, Journal of constitutional and parliament studies, October- December, 1977, Vol.XCI, No.4, pp.61-69. Also see, Rakshit, Nirmolendru Bikash, “judicial Review in India”, The Modern Review, April 1975, p.260.
5. Jackson. R.M “The Machinery of Justice in England” pp 394 – 395.
6. Crosskey W. William. “Politics and the Constitution in the History of the U. S” Vo l.II, p.941.
7. Sabine H. George “A History of Political theory” 1957 p.384
8. Jain, M.P., Indian Constitutional Law, 1987, p. 461.
9. I.R. Ceolho v/s State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2007 SC, p. 861; L Chandra Kumar v/s Union of India, AIR 1997 SC, p.1125.
10. AIR 1951 p.226
11. Partha v/s State of Mysore, AIR 1961 Mys 220 to 230. The court stated that the “caste classification will be only open to challenge if it can be shown that the criterion adopted for determining their backwardness is useless as test of backwardness so that the preference would amount to a preference on grounds of caste alone.”
12. AIR 1963 SC p.659
13. Ibid, p. 660.
14. 1971 (1) Mys L.J. p.21
15. Ibid. p.23
16. AIR 1993, p.229
17. AIR 2006 SC, p.597
18. State of U.P V/S Pradip Tandon, AIR 1975 p. 567
19. AIR 1975 SC p.930 at 938
20. AIR 1973 SC p.941
21. AIR 1993 SC 477 at 589
22. AIR 1967 SC, 490 at 517-18
23. Hindustan Zinc v/s A.P. State Electricity Board 1991 (3) SCC p.299, AIR 1993 Vol.80, p.621.
24. Dr. Sadhna Devi & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors 1997(2) SCR p.186:
25. Mohan Bir Singh Chawla Vs. Panjab University Chandigarh & Anr, AIR 1997 SC p.788,
26. Dr. Preeti Srivastava & Anr. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. AIR1999 SC p.2894
27. Parliament Debates on the Constitution 44th Bill.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
