GS Question

The filing of a large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities can be justified in the context of separation of powers as envisaged in the Indian Constitution. While some argue that judicial legislation is antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers, it is important to recognize that the doctrine of separation of powers is not an absolute principle but rather a flexible concept that allows for checks and balances among the branches of government.

1. Addressing legislative gaps: In a democratic system, the legislature is primarily responsible for making laws. However, there may be instances where the legislature fails to enact laws or has legislative gaps that need to be addressed. In such cases, public interest petitions serve as a means to fill these gaps by seeking guidelines or directions from the judiciary. This does not necessarily amount to judicial legislation but rather an interpretation or clarification of existing laws.

2. Protecting fundamental rights: The judiciary is an important check on the executive authorities to ensure protection of fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution. Public interest petitions play a crucial role in holding the executive accountable and ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions. By seeking guidelines, petitioners aim to establish a framework for executive actions that comply with these fundamental rights.

3. Preventing abuse of power: The separation of powers doctrine is aimed at preventing any one branch from excessively wielding power. When executive authorities exceed their constitutional limits or abuse their power, public interest petitions can serve as a safeguard against such abuses. By seeking guidelines from the judiciary, the petitions help in setting boundaries and ensuring that executive actions are within the limits prescribed by law.

4. Promoting transparency and accountability: Guidelines issued by the judiciary in response to public interest petitions can help in promoting transparency and accountability in governance. They provide a roadmap for executive authorities to follow while exercising their powers, thereby reducing the scope for arbitrary or discretionary actions. This enhances the rule of law and strengthens the democratic system.

5. Judicial interpretation vs. judicial legislation: It is important to distinguish between judicial interpretation and judicial legislation. Judicial interpretation involves the judiciary's role in interpreting the constitution and existing laws to address specific cases or issues. On the other hand, judicial legislation refers to the judiciary's encroachment on the legislative domain by creating new laws. Public interest petitions seeking guidelines primarily fall under the category of judicial interpretation, where the judiciary clarifies or provides directions within the existing legal framework.

In conclusion, the filing of a large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities can be justified as a necessary mechanism for ensuring the protection of fundamental rights, preventing abuse of power, promoting transparency, and addressing legislative gaps. When done within the boundaries of judicial interpretation, such petitions contribute to the effective functioning of the separation of powers envisaged in the Indian Constitution.