Judiciary and executive are two major component of our vibrant democracy. Their free and fair functioning lead to smooth functioning of a democratic country. The doctrine of separation of power and checks and balances has to be followed. But excessive check and balance lead to undue interference and this is the source of tussle.
Major issues are as follows:
- Issue of appointment, transfer of Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts. India is rare country where Judiciary appoints itself.
- Judiciary giving executive directions which is the domain of executive like
- Ban on the liquor shops near highways
- Interlinking of rivers
- Cancellation of 2G spectrum
- Direct allocation of natural resources
- Use of article 142-SC can pass any decree for enforcement of its jurisdiction. Its use sometimes create tussle between Judiciary and executive.
- List of cases where judicial overreach is there:
- PIL filed by MC Mehta lead to relocation of 168 large industries, rendering thousand jobless.
- Similarly Delhi vehicular pollution case led to conversion of all public transport cases resulting in a sudden drop in public transport supply and an increase in private vehicles.
- To prevent the Populist measure taken by executive which can be detrimental for the country in long run, Judiciary pass some decree or ordes.
Judicial overreach may have a disproportionately large financial burden on state exchequer as well pressure on judiciary that amounts to pendency of cases later. As the doctrine of separation of powers is not codified in the constitution, the judiciary must evolve a set of guidelines that lays down a procedure in consonance with the executive so that it does not delve into issues which are beyond its domain of expertise. If at all such a necessity arises, the mandate of the Supreme Court’s recently constituted in-house think tank, ‘Centre for Research and Planning’, could be enlarged to encompass the necessary academic rigour required for issues related to governance.
