Fr.Johnson Punchakonam
If the Kerala Legislative Assembly passes a bill that goes against a Supreme Court verdict, it would create a conflict between state legislation and judicial authority. The legal framework and constitutional principles of India provide mechanisms to address such a situation:
I. Constitutional Supremacy
Constitutional supremacy is a fundamental principle in the Indian legal system, ensuring that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land. This principle establishes that any law or legislative action must align with the Constitution, and any law inconsistent with the Constitution is deemed invalid.
Key Aspects of Constitutional Supremacy:
1. “Hierarchy of Laws”:
The Constitution stands at the apex of the legal hierarchy in India. Below it are laws enacted by Parliament and state legislatures, followed by executive orders, rules, and regulations.
2. Judicial Review:
The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court and High Courts, has the power to review the laws and actions of the government to ensure they are in conformity with the Constitution.
3. Role of the Judiciary:
The judiciary acts as the guardian of the Constitution. It interprets and enforces constitutional provisions, ensuring that all branches of government operate within their constitutionally defined limits.
4. Amendment Process:
The Constitution provides a mechanism for its own amendment under Article 368. However, even amendments must respect the “basic structure” doctrine, ensuring that the core principles of the Constitution are preserved.
5. “Fundamental Rights Protection”:
The Constitution guarantees fundamental rights to individuals, and any law or action violating these rights can be struck down by the courts.
II. Application to Legislative Actions:
1. Constitutional Compliance:
The bill must comply with the provisions of the Constitution, including respecting fundamental rights and adhering to the distribution of powers between the central and state governments.
2. Judicial Review:
If the bill is challenged, the judiciary can review its constitutionality. The courts assess whether the bill aligns with constitutional provisions and principles. If the bill is found to violate the Constitution, it can be declared null and void.
3. Supreme Court Precedents:
The bill must also comply with binding precedents set by the Supreme Court. If the bill contradicts a Supreme Court ruling, it is likely to be struck down upon judicial review.
4. Federal Structure:
The bill must respect the federal structure of India, meaning it should not encroach upon the legislative domain of the central government.
III. Judicial Review
Judicial review is a cornerstone of the Indian legal system, granting the judiciary the authority to examine the constitutionality of legislative acts and executive actions. This mechanism ensures that all laws and actions adhere to the Constitution, maintaining the rule of law and protecting individual rights.
Key Aspects of Judicial Review:
1. Scope and Authority:
The Supreme Court and High Courts have the power to review laws passed by both the central and state legislatures, scrutinizing the constitutionality of statutes, executive orders, and other governmental actions.
2. Constitutional Provisions:
Judicial review is implicit in several constitutional provisions, including Article 13, which declares that any law inconsistent with the Constitution shall be void. Articles 32 and 226 empower the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
3. “Fundamental Rights Protection“:
The judiciary plays a critical role in protecting fundamental rights. If a legislative act infringes upon these rights, it can be struck down through judicial review.
4. Doctrine of Basic Structure:
Established in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), this doctrine asserts that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be altered by amendments.
IV. Application to State Legislation:
1. Examination of Constitutionality:
If the bill contradicts a Supreme Court verdict or any constitutional provision, it can be challenged in court.
2. Conflict with Supreme Court Verdicts:
The Supreme Court’s decisions are binding on all lower courts and legislative bodies. If a bill conflicts with a Supreme Court ruling, the judiciary can review and potentially invalidate the bill.
3. Judicial Process:
Upon receiving a petition challenging the bill, the Supreme Court would hear arguments from both sides, assess the bill’s compliance with constitutional provisions, and review relevant precedents.
4. Interim Relief:
During the review process, the Supreme Court may issue interim orders to suspend the implementation of the bill, preventing any immediate legal or practical implications until a final judgment is made.
5. Final Judgment:
The Supreme Court’s final judgment will determine the bill’s validity. If found unconstitutional, the bill will be struck down.
V. Doctrine of Precedent
The doctrine of precedent ensures consistency and predictability in the law by binding courts to follow previously decided cases. This principle, also known as stare decisis, mandates that lower courts adhere to the legal rulings of higher courts, particularly the Supreme Court.
Key Aspects of the Doctrine of Precedent:
1. “Binding Nature”:
Decisions made by the Supreme Court are binding on all lower courts in India.
2. Hierarchy of Courts:
The judicial system in India is hierarchical, with the Supreme Court at the top, followed by the High Courts, and then the subordinate courts.
3. Legal Consistency:
The doctrine promotes legal consistency and predictability by ensuring similar cases are decided similarly.
4. Judicial Discipline:
It fosters judicial discipline by obligating judges to respect and follow previous decisions.
5. Role of the Supreme Court:
As the highest court in India, the Supreme Court’s decisions are the ultimate precedents.
VI. Application to Legislative Actions:
1. Compliance with Supreme Court Rulings:
Any bill passed by a state legislature must comply with existing Supreme Court rulings. If a bill contradicts a Supreme Court decision, it risks being struck down through judicial review.
2. Judicial Scrutiny:
If a bill that contradicts a Supreme Court ruling is passed, it can be challenged in court.
3. Invalidation of Contradictory Legislation:
The Supreme Court has the authority to invalidate any state legislation that contradicts its rulings.
4. Legislative Limitations:
State legislatures are limited in their legislative powers by the requirement to adhere to Supreme Court precedents.
VII. Conflict Resolution Mechanisms
1. “Immediate Legal Challenge”:
If the Kerala Legislative Assembly passes such a bill, it is highly likely that it will be immediately challenged in court.
2. Suspension of the Bill:
Pending judicial review, the Supreme Court might issue an interim order to suspend the implementation of the bill.
3. Final Judgment:
After hearing arguments from both sides, the Supreme Court would issue a final judgment. If it finds the bill unconstitutional, it will strike it down.
VIII. Federal Structure and Legislative Competence
1. Clear Demarcation of Powers:
India has a federal structure with a clear demarcation of powers between the central and state governments.
2. President’s Assent:
In some cases, state bills that potentially conflict with central laws or Supreme Court verdicts may be reserved for the President’s consideration.
IX. Article 131: Adjudication of Inter-State and Central-State Disputes
Article 131 of the Indian Constitution provides the Supreme Court with original jurisdiction over disputes involving states or between states and the central government.
Key Provisions of Article 131:
1. Jurisdiction:
Article 131 grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in cases involving disputes between the Government of India and one or more states or between two or more states.
2. Scope:
The disputes must involve questions of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends.
X. Application to Legislative Conflicts:
1. “Filing a Case”:
The central government or another state could file a suit directly with the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality or legislative competence of the bill.
2. Grounds for Challenge:
The challenge might be based on a violation of the Constitution, encroachment on central legislative powers, or conflict with existing Supreme Court rulings.
3. Supreme Court Proceedings:
The Supreme Court would examine the case, considering legal arguments from both sides.
4. Interim Measures:
The Supreme Court may issue interim orders, such as staying the implementation of the disputed bill.
5. Final Judgment:
The Supreme Court’s final judgment would determine whether the bill is constitutional.
Conclusion
If the Kerala Legislative Assembly passes a bill that contradicts a Supreme Court verdict, it would set the stage for judicial review. The Supreme Court, exercising its constitutional authority, would likely nullify the bill if it found it unconstitutional or contradictory to its earlier verdict. This upholds the principle of judicial supremacy and ensures that all legislative actions comply with the constitutional framework.
About The Author
