Page 78 - 5_COMPENDIUM VOL-5

VOLUME – V CHAPTER 1

majority are not unanimously agreed on this aspect. [There
were five judgments for the majority, delivered by Sikri, C.J.,
Shelat & Grover, JJ. Hegde & Mukherjee, JJ. Jaganmohan

Reddy, J. and Khanna, J. While Khanna, J. did not attempt to
catalogue the basic features, the identification of the basic
features by the other Judges are specified in the following paras
of the Court's judgments : Sikri, C.J. (para 292), Shelat and
Grover, JJ. (para 582), Hegde and Mukherjee, JJ. (paras 632 &
661) and Jaganmohan Reddy, J. (paras 1159, 1161)]. The aspect
of judicial review does not find elaborate mention in all the
majority judgments. Khanna, J. did, however, squarely address
the issue (at para 1529):

..The power of judicial review is, however, confined not
merely to deciding whether in making the impugned laws
the Central or State Legislatures have acted within the
four corners of the legislative lists earmarked for them;
the courts also deal with the question as to whether the
laws are made in conformity with and not in violation of
the other provisions of the Constitution... As long as
some fundamental rights exist and are a part of the
Constitution, the power of judicial review has also to be
exercised with a view to see that the guarantees afforded
by those rights are not contravened.... Judicial review has
thus become an integral part of our constitutional system
and a power has been vested in the High Courts and the
Supreme Court to decide about the constitutional validity
of provisions of statutes. If the provisions of the statute
are found to be violative of any article of the
Constitution, which is touchstone for the validity of all
laws, the Supreme Court and the High Courts are
empowered to strike down the said provisions.”

6. It was further submitted that the exclusion of judicial review

under Article 226 of the Constitution ought not to be countenanced

because of lack of any viable alternative appeal mechanism. This, in

5

66