Article 142: The Supreme Power or Judicial Overreach?
Kartavya Desk Staff
Syllabus: Judiciary
Source: DD News
Context: The Supreme Court’s invocation of Article 142 in the Tamil Nadu Bill controversy has reignited debates about judicial overreach and constitutional balance between the judiciary, executive, and legislature.
About Article 142:
What is Article 142?
• Allows the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order “necessary for doing complete justice” in any case pending before it.
• Objective: Originally intended as a tool to bridge gaps in law where strict adherence to legal procedures would deny justice.
Constitutional Provision:
• Article 142(1): Enables passing enforceable decrees or orders to ensure complete justice.
• Article 142(2): Empowers the Court to secure attendance, document production, and punishment for contempt across India.
Tamil Nadu Bill Controversy and Judicial Outcome
• Background: In 2024, the Tamil Nadu Governor delayed assent on 11 bills, stalling legislative processes.
• Supreme Court Action: Using Article 142, the Court deemed the bills passed without awaiting Presidential assent.
• Judgement Outcome: Bypassed executive bottlenecks. Raised concerns about the Court assuming quasi-legislative powers. Altered the balance among constitutional authorities by sidelining the Governor and indirectly the President.
• Bypassed executive bottlenecks.
• Raised concerns about the Court assuming quasi-legislative powers.
• Altered the balance among constitutional authorities by sidelining the Governor and indirectly the President.
Article 142 Can Lead to Judicial Overreach:
• Bypassing Executive Authority: Courts enforce decisions directly without waiting for legislative or executive responses (e.g., Tamil Nadu case).
• Erosion of Federalism: Judiciary overrides states and Union’s constitutional roles, affecting Centre-State relations.
• Threat to Separation of Powers: Frequent use makes the judiciary a super-legislature and weakens democratic accountability.
• Undermining Constitutional Remedies: Legislative delays or executive errors could be resolved by other constitutional means instead of judicial enforcement.
Article 142 Does Not Always Lead to Overreach:
• Ensures Complete Justice: Used sparingly to uphold citizens’ rights where no legal remedy exists (e.g., Union Carbide Bhopal gas case 1989).
• Safeguards Fundamental Rights: Helps prevent injustice when rigid application of law would cause harm.
• Temporary Relief: Measures under Article 142 are interim and tailored for specific cases without necessarily setting binding precedents.
• Acts as a Safety Valve: Provides flexibility in exceptional situations where other remedies are inadequate.
Way Ahead:
• Guidelines for Use: Establish a judicial protocol limiting use of Article 142 to rare and truly extraordinary cases.
• Strengthen Legislative Procedures: Ensure quicker executive and legislative action to prevent judicial interventions.
• Encourage Dialogue among Organs: Promote healthy consultation between Judiciary, Legislature, and Executive.
• Parliamentary Oversight: Pass legislation under Article 142(1) to define its boundaries, ensuring checks and balances.
Conclusion:
Article 142 remains a powerful judicial instrument meant for extraordinary situations. However, its overuse risks upsetting India’s delicate constitutional equilibrium. To safeguard democracy, each constitutional organ must respect the boundaries set by the Constitution.
• Discuss the desirability of greater representation to women in the higher judiciary to ensure diversity, equity and inclusiveness. (UPSC-2021)