Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to interpret the constitution and its values and to maintain a check on the legislature and executive if they act in abrogation of the rights of people, guaranteed under the constitution. The judiciary has the power to declare such law or order void if it contravenes the basic structure of the constitution and threatens the democratic spirit. Judicial Review acts as the checks and balances in the separation of powers, reviewing the legality of decisions made by the legislature and the executive, and nullifying those decisions that violate the basic structure of the constitution.
The Constitution has entrusted the role of protection of fundamental rights to the Supreme Court and the High Courts under Articles 32 and 226 respectively. These courts review administrative action through writs issued under these provisions, for the enforcement of fundamental rights of individuals. Judicial Review has evolved in three dimensions- firstly to ensure accountability in administrative action, secondly the protection of fundamental rights of citizens and thirdly, to adjudicate on the law-making powers of the Parliament as against the law-making powers of State Legislatures. This power of judicial review also extends to constitutional amendments that have been declared unconstitutional by the courts, on account of being violative of any basic or essential feature of the constitution.
The courts through this potent weapon of judicial review have also contributed towards eliminating injustice and exploitation by way of entertaining public interest litigation wherein a cause or illegality affecting a large group of people is brought to court by a person not having any personal interest in the litigation. The court through decisions in such petitions has ensured social justice and equality for those who are unable to approach the court by themselves.
It is the duty of the courts to check the legality of administrative action and ensure that they are not violative of the constitution. In doing so, the courts frequently exceed their powers in the name of supervising the prevention of abuse of power. The courts must refrain from taking over the powers of the legislature and encroaching upon its functions of policymaking which is to be carried out by elected representatives. They should not exercise any power that is arbitrary and amounts to overreach, against the ideals of the constitution. As was rightly held in the landmark case of Golaknath v. State of Punjab AIR 1967 SC 1643 that: “No authority created under the Constitution is supreme: the Constitution is supreme and all the authorities function under the supreme law of the land.”