judicial review

Judicial review is the power of the superior courts to test the validity of legislation and of administrative action. Legislation may be struck down for lack of legislative competence, for violating fundamental rights (Article 13) or for damaging the basic structure (in the case of constitutional amendments). Administrative action may be quashed for illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety or disproportionality.

In India the power is express: Article 13 declares inconsistent laws void, and Articles 32 and 226 provide the remedy. The Supreme Court has held that judicial review is itself part of the basic structure and cannot be taken away even by constitutional amendment. Unlike the United Kingdom, where Parliament is supreme, Indian courts can invalidate primary legislation.

Example

Through judicial review under Article 226, the High Court quashed the transfer order as arbitrary and violative of Article 14.

In Indian law

• Articles 13, 32 and 226, Constitution of India
• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973 INSC 91: basic structure limits on amendment
• L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, 1997 INSC 288: judicial review by High Courts is part of the basic structure

See also

basic structure doctrine · writ · Wednesbury unreasonableness · judicial activism

Read more in the study notes

• Administrative discretion and its judicial review (Administrative Law)
• Administrative law: meaning, nature, scope, growth and sources (Administrative Law)
• Separation of powers and its bearing on administrative law (Administrative Law)
• Delegated legislation: meaning, growth, merits and administrative directions (Administrative Law)
• Control of delegated legislation: parliamentary, procedural and judicial (Administrative Law)
• Reasoned decisions, exceptions to natural justice, effect of breach and Article 136 (Administrative Law)