UPSC Prelims 2019 Q52: Indian Polity – Judiciary
- (a) The decisions taken by the Election Commission of India while discharging its duties cannot be challenged in any court of law.
- (b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
- (c) In the event of grave financial crisis in the country, the President of India can declare Financial Emergency without the counsel from the Cabinet.
- (d) State Legislatures cannot make laws on certain matters without the concurrence of Union Legislature.
Answer: (b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
Explanation
Article 142: Supreme Court's Extraordinary Power
| Option | Claim | Verdict | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | ECI decisions can't be challenged in court | WRONG | This relates to Article 329(b) which bars courts from entertaining election disputes except through an election petition, and to Article 324 governing ECI powers - not Article 142's decree-making power. |
| (b) | SC not constrained by ordinary parliamentary laws in exercising its powers | CORRECT | Article 142 empowers SC to pass any decree or order 'necessary for doing complete justice'. In SC v Union Carbide (Bhopal case) and Vineet Narain, court held: ordinary law limitations cannot fetter Article 142 powers. |
| (c) | President's Financial Emergency without Cabinet advice | WRONG | Financial Emergency is proclaimed under Article 360 on Cabinet advice and requires parliamentary approval within 2 months - a presidential emergency power, wholly separate from the Supreme Court's Article 142 jurisdiction. |
| (d) | State laws needing Union concurrence | WRONG | This concerns Article 254 (repugnancy in the Concurrent List, where Central law prevails) and Article 252 (Union legislation on request of States) - Centre-State legislative competence, not SC's decree-making powers. |
Answer: (b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
Answer: (b) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
Why each option is right or wrong
- (a) Incorrect. ECI challenge relates to Articles 324/329, not Article 142.
- (b) CORRECT. Article 142 gives SC power to do 'complete justice' - and ordinary parliamentary laws cannot override this constitutional power. Landmark: Union Carbide, Bhopal Gas Tragedy case.
- (c) Incorrect. Financial Emergency is Article 360, not Article 142.
- (d) Incorrect. Concurrence for State laws is Article 254 (Concurrent List), not Article 142.
Key point
Article 142 = SC's power to do 'complete justice'. Cannot be restricted by ordinary parliamentary law. Used in Bhopal Gas case, Ayodhya case, Vishaka guidelines, Ganga cleaning etc.
Remember
Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court of India to pass any decree or order necessary for doing 'complete justice'. Prohibitions or limitations in ordinary laws cannot restrict this constitutional power - meaning the Supreme Court is not constrained in the exercise of its Article 142 powers by ordinary laws made by Parliament.
Common mistakes
- Confusing Article 142 (SC's justice power) with Article 32 (writ jurisdiction) - both are wide but different.
- Assuming Parliament can restrict Article 142 - only constitutional amendment can.
- Not knowing Article 142 has been used to give final relief when statutory framework is silent or inadequate.
Exam tip
Article 142 landmark uses: (i) Bhopal Gas Tragedy compensation. (ii) Vishaka Guidelines (sexual harassment). (iii) Ayodhya land dispute (2019). (iv) Manual scavenging directives. (v) Money laundering trial directions. Broad, judiciary-defined power.
Sources
- Constitution of India - Article 142
- SC judgment - Union Carbide Corporation v Union of India (Bhopal, 1991)