JUDICIAL REVIEW

INTRODUCTION
The Concept of Judicial Review Judicial review, in its narrow
usage, especially since its adoption in the American
constitutional system, has been used to indicate the institutional
arrangements by which courts of law pronounce judgment on the
constitutional validity of the disputed piece of legislation enacted
by the law-making organ viz., legislature and the Parliament.
Judicial review can be considered as mechanism for upholding
the supremacy of the basic law in a country governed by ideal of
political constitutionalism. Also, judicial review implies a
comprehensive judicial enquiry into, and examinations of the
action of the legislative, executive and administrative branches
of government, with specific purposes of ensuring their
conformity to the specified constitutional provisions.
 JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA
Under the constitution of India parliament is not supreme. Its
powers are limited in the two ways. First, there is the
division of powers between the union and the states.
Parliament is competent to pass laws only with respect to those
subjects which are guaranteed to the citizens against every
form of legislative encroachment.
Being the guardian of Fundamental Rights and the arbiter of
constitutional conflicts between the union and the states with
respect to the division of powers between them, the
Supreme Court stands in a unique position where from it
is competent to exercise the power of reviewing legislative
enactments both of parliament and the state legislatures.
This is what makes the court a powerful instrument of
judicial review under the constitution. As Dr. M.P.
Jain has rightly observed: "The doctrine of
judicial review is thus firmly rooted in India, and
has the explicit sanction of the constitution."
 CASES
Shankari Prasad vs. Union of India
Sajan Singh's case
Golak Nath vs. The state of Punjab
Minerva Mills case
 RESTRICTION
Judicial review of political issues:
Keshavananda Bharathi case, the Court noted that "involves
tampering with the Constitution judicial review of cases may
involve political issues, but only the court has the power to judge
cases. interpret the Constitution's powers should be attributed to the
State jurisdiction ".
The basic principles of judicial review of constitutional status: In
1973, the Supreme Court in the landmark Keshavananda Bharathi
v. State of Kerala case presented the basic principles of judicial
review. Legislature can amend the constitution, but cannot change the
basic principles of the Constitution. If the violation of basic
constitutional principles, constitutes unconstitutional is generally
believed that the basic principles of the Constitution of India
AIR 1973 SC 1461
Judicial activism the expansion of judicial review
Menaka Gandhi, the Supreme Court to promote the
implementation of the Constitution in terms of protection of
citizens basic human rights, and to seek India's laws in line
with the global trend of legal protection of basic
human rights. The court of human rights protection
thanks to a series of successful litigation procedural law
reform, as introduced in the procedural law of social
activities on litigation, public interest litigation and other
new design of the system, so that vulnerable groups in
society can more easily enter the judicial process.
AIR 1978 SC 597
 EXTENT OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
 A Court cannot take up a matter for judicial review
sua moto. It has to wait till the case is brought before
it by the parties or through PIL.
The Court cannot enter into policy decisions of the
government such as the economic policy. Also matters
involving political questions cannot be decided by the
Court.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and all
state organs .
The main controversy is that whether amendment of
the Constitution is subject to judicial review.
THANK YOU!!!!!