Subject: Indian Polity

The emergence of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as a tool for judicial activism has sparked debates about its compatibility with the principle of separation of powers, especially given the rising number of PILs seeking executive guidelines, with 113,904 PILs filed in the Supreme Court in 2021 alone.

Understanding Judicial Legislation and Separation of Powers

• The doctrine of Separation of Powers under Article 50 ensures independence between legislature, executive, and judiciary, preventing concentration of power and promoting checks and balances.
• Judicial Review under Articles 32 and 226 empowers courts to examine constitutional validity of legislative and executive actions.
• Recent trends show courts issuing guidelines through PILs on matters traditionally within executive domain (e.g., Delhi CNG conversion case, Vishaka Guidelines).

Justification for PIL Guidelines

• Executive Inaction: PILs address governance gaps where executive fails to protect fundamental rights (e.g., Right to Clean Environment cases).
• Constitutional Mandate: Courts fulfill their role as guardians of fundamental rights under Article 32.
• Social Justice: PILs have benefited marginalized sections through judicial intervention (e.g., Bonded Labor cases, Right to Education).

Balancing Separation of Powers

• Judicial Self-Restraint: Courts maintain restraint through principles like:

  • Political question doctrine.
  • Policy decisions left to executive wisdom.
  • Focus on constitutional rights violations.

• Collaborative Governance: PILs promote dialogue between judiciary and executive through:

  • Monitoring committees.
  • Time-bound implementation frameworks.
  • Regular progress reports.

Way Forward

• Structured Guidelines: Development of clear parameters for PIL admission and disposal.
• Institutional Capacity: Strengthening executive mechanisms for rights protection.
• Time-bound Resolution: Ensuring swift implementation of judicial directives.

The rising trend of PILs, from an average of 26,379 annually (1985-2019) to over 100,000 in recent years, reflects their crucial role in ensuring constitutional governance. While judicial legislation through PILs may appear to challenge traditional separation of powers, it serves as a necessary tool for protecting fundamental rights and promoting good governance, as exemplified by landmark cases like MC Mehta and Vishaka Guidelines.