Tussle Of Powers: Judiciary & Legislature
By Team Legistify / 2017-07-04
The Doctrine of Separation of power upholds that the three parts of the state, ie; Legislature, Judiciary and Executive, are independent from each other. However, in the Indian context, this separation is not watertight. Judiciary has been given more independence since it is the custodian of the rights of the citizens and also has the power to review the legislation passed by the Legislature. The importance to judiciary, evolved through case laws, has often created tussle between the different parts of the State.

Have a Legal Issue?

Get connected to the Best Lawyers and Chartered Accountants Near You!


The Legislature at time limits the powers of the Judiciary by formulating laws which would restrict the judiciary’s power to review. Decisions which have been taken by the Legislation governing it are always under the purview of Article 13. For example, a tax levied through a legislation if found questionable can be rendered void through Judicial autonomy; However, the power to review such law could be abridged by the Legislature through the insertion of a Validation clause that validates a tax declared by a court to be illegally collected under an ineffective or an invalid law.

Doctrine of Separation of Powers

The tussle between the Judiciary, Legislature and Executive arises out of the virtue of the separation of powers. This doctrine promulgates that all the three vital organs of the State are independent of each other and are equally important for the proper and effcient functioning of a state. The French scholar Montesquieu pointed out as early as in the sixteenth century that placing power in the hands of only one organ or group in a government entails tyranny. Thus to check this problem he felt that the solution would be to vest power in three distinct organs of the government, namely, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.

This would allow each organ to be independent of the other such that no encroachment or overlapping of powers may exist and a harmony may be reached which would aid the smooth running of the government. The idea behind such a philosophy was that if the executive and legislative power vested in the same hands then it woulf result in a lot of despotism and arbitrariness.

The American politician. James Madison , better known as the ‘ Father of the American Constitution ’ also believed the same and articulated the following, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judicial, in the same hands whether of one, a few, or many and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."

The Doctrine of Separation of power upholds that the three parts of the state, ie; Legislature, Judiciary and Executive, are independent from each other. However, in the Indian context, this separation is not watertight. Judiciary has been given more independence since it is the custodian of the rights of the citizens and also has the power to review the legislation passed by the Legislature. The importance to judiciary, evolved through case laws, has often created tussle between the different parts of the State.

Have a Legal Issue?

Get connected to the Best Lawyers and Chartered Accountants Near You!


Related Posts

Read Our Blogs on Similar Topics