Introduction 

India has its three organs which form the entire body of government.  This particularly includes the legislature, executive and judiciary. 

• The legislature's role is to institute laws, the executive's role is to administer these laws, and the judiciary's role is to check the credibility of those laws shaped by the legislature. 
• The judiciary has the authority of judicial review, or judicial scrutiny of the exertions or undertaking of legislative, executive, and administrative arms of the directorate or government.  
• The paramount intention of performing such an act is to check whether the actions are under the purview of the law of land i.e. Constitution or not. 

What is Judicial Review? 

• It is a type of court proceeding in which a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body. 
• In other words, judicial reviews challenge how a decision has been made, rather than the rights and wrongs of the conclusion reached. 
• Judicial review has two important functions, like, of legitimizing government action and the protection of constitution against any undue encroachment by the gov­ernment. 
• Judicial review is also called the interpretational and observer roles of the Indian judiciary. 

Types of Judicial Review 

• Reviews of Legislative Actions: 
  • This review implies the power to ensure that laws passed by the legislature are following the provisions of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI).  
• Review of Administrative Actions: 
  • This is a tool for enforcing constitutional discipline over administrative agencies while exercising their powers. 
• Review of Judicial Decisions: 
  • This review is used to correct or make any change in previous decisions by the judiciary itself. 

Scope of Judicial Review

• The constitutional validity of a legislative enactment or an executive order can be challenged in the Supreme Court or in the High Court on the following grounds. 
  • It violates the Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of Constitution. 
  • It is outside the competence of the authority which has framed it.  
  • It is repugnant to the constitutional provisions. 

Limitations of Judicial Review 

• It limits the functioning of the government. 
• It violates the limit of power set to be exercised by the constitution when it overrides any existing law. 
• In India, a separation of functions rather than of powers is followed. 
• The concept of separation of powers is not adhered to strictly.  
• The judicial opinions of the judges once taken for any case becomes the standard for ruling other cases. 
• Judicial review can harm the public at large as the judgment may be influenced by personal or selfish motives. 
• Repeated interventions of courts can diminish the faith of the people in the integrity, quality, and efficiency of the government. 

Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Review 

• There is no direct and express provision in the constitution empowering the courts to invalidate.  
• Some provisions in the constitution supporting the process of judicial review are:
  
  • Article 372 (1): Establishes the judicial review of the pre-constitution legislation. 
  • Article 13: Declares that any law which contravenes any of the provisions of the part of Funda­mental Rights shall be void. 
  • Articles 32 and 226: Entrusts the roles of the protector and guarantor of fundamental rights to the Supreme and High Courts. 
  • Articles 251 and 254: In case of inconsistency between union and state laws, the state law shall be void. 
  • Article 246 (3): Ensures the state legislature’s exclusive powers on matters pertaining to the State List. 
  • Article 245: The powers of Parliament and State legislatures are subject to the constitution's provisions. 
  • Articles 131-136: Entrusts the court with the power to adjudicate disputes between individuals, between individuals and the state, between the states and the union; but the court may be required to interpret the provisions of the constitution and the interpretation given by the Supreme Court becomes the law honoured by all courts of the land. 
  • Article 137: Gives a special power to the SC to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it. An order passed in a criminal case can be reviewed and set aside only if there are errors apparent on the record.

Landmark Judgements Based on Judicial Review

• Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967):  
  • In this case the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament lacked the authority to change the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution.  
  • This judgment was eventually reversed by the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, which empowered Parliament to change any aspect of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights. 
• Keshwanand Bharti v. Union of India (1973):  
  • In this case it was held that nothing can be kept aside from the purview of judicial review if it violated the basic structure of the constitution. 
• Indira Gandhi v. Rak Narain (1975):  
  • In this case, judicial review was held as part of the basic structure of the constitution. 
• Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan (1997):  
  • In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that workplace sexual harassment violates women's basic rights.  
  • The court issued advice for companies on how to prevent and address workplace harassment. 

Conclusion 

The concept of Judicial review first emerged from the United States Constitution. Judicial review helps to keep a check and balance on the functioning of the legislature, executives and administrative functions. India has the concept of check and balance which also keeps a check on the judicial decisions which prevents judiciary from committing any arbitrariness.