Question Q.12 (continued)GS2GS2

आलोचकों का कहना है कि अनिर्दिष्ट न्यायिक अधिकार मूल ढाँचा सिद्धांत को संरचनात्मक अस्पष्टता पर निर्भर करते हैं। क्या न्यायिक सक्रियता मूल संविधान को न्यायालयिका को अधिकारशील बना दिया है?

Main Body

Caselaw - Moderawfulfuller with "powerful"

1Nwajanja Case (2006): In "RULE OF LAW" it directs Executive to collect inadequate manifestation of mililonists for restoration.

2Aihava Kills Case: St "balances" DPR and Fundamental Rights (Article 32(1)(c) to protect affected Habeas)

3S Iournai Case: DPR and case (exorcist law overwritten in Graiditins Federalism based principle)

4NJAC Case: Independence of Judiciary However it can be argued that the Elasticity harmed made judiciary strafe than executive:

a) It is filling gaps in executive overreach.

than executive.

(b) It is protected constitutes against POLITICAL MUTILATION of Constitution (through ordinances etc).

c) It is limited power -> doctrine of Proportionality (Puttaswamy case)

d) Ensuring federal section -> Kilostolludhan Case

Ensuing federalism is => S St, not subverted by

Ensuing all(e) (not clarified) -> Indira Sahney Case

Although bare doctrine is elastic, its judicial interpretation is upholding:

a) accountability -> Parliament ®

b) executive to -> electorate

Thus, the basic structure remains a cardinal part of our polity. The judiciary must ascertain SELF RESTRAINT and uphold separation of powers.

175 words10 paragraphs

Conclusion

Thus, the basic structure remains a cardinal part of our polity. The judiciary must ascertain SELF RESTRAINT and uphold separation of powers.

22 words

This is a continuation from previous page

Open original scan

Page 29

Topper

Eshani Anand

AIR 792023

Subject & Paper

GS2GS2

Topic

Indian Constitution - Historical Underpinnings, Evolution, Features, Amendments, Significant Provisions and Basic Structure

Basic Structure

Judicial activism and landmark cases

Writing Stats

197

Total words

Paragraphs

analytical

Tone