Judicial legislation is antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers as envisaged in the Indian Constitution. In this context justify the filing of large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities. (250 words)
Judicial legislation is considered antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers as envisaged in the Indian Constitution, as it allows the judiciary to legislate on issues that are traditionally the domain of the executive or legislative branches of government. Despite this, the filing of large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities can be justified in the following ways:
- The Indian Constitution grants the judiciary the power of judicial review, which allows it to examine the constitutionality of laws and actions of the executive and legislative branches. This power can be exercised through the filing of public interest petitions.
- Public interest petitions allow individuals or groups to bring issues of public concern before the court, and seek remedies to address these issues. This can include issues related to the violation of fundamental rights, or the failure of the executive to discharge its duties.
- In some cases, the executive may be unwilling or unable to address certain issues, or may not have the necessary powers to do so. In such cases, the judiciary can step in and issue guidelines to the executive in order to ensure that the issues are addressed.
- The issuance of guidelines by the judiciary can serve as a means of holding the executive accountable, and ensuring that it fulfills its responsibilities towards the public.
Overall, while judicial legislation may be considered antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers, the filing of public interest petitions and the issuance of guidelines by the judiciary can serve as a means of ensuring that the executive discharges its duties and responsibilities in a manner that is in the best interests of the public.
