Judicial Review

Judicial Process

The primary objective of any legal system is to guarantee the enforcement of rights as vested by the Constitution and the laws made thereof. The maxim "ubi jus, ibi remedium" captures the purpose of a legal system by stating that "where there is a right; there is a remedy". Therefore, it is commonly understood that only individual(s) whose rights have been violated could approach the Courts for the appropriate judicial remedies. It is essential to first prove that a right exists; then that the particular right has been violated; and therefore a remedy is warranted. Broadly, this process pertains to the petitioner or the claimant proving the locus standi (refers to the standing of the petitioner being in significant connection with the cause being disputed) to be entitled for the remedies. Access to justice and the procedure of judicial remedies demanded that the functioning of the Courts not be burdened by claims of such persons who are not directly/significantly related to the disputed cause of action. It is relevant to mention that the nature and process of judicial remedies that the Courts guarantee in response to criminal offences do not strictly require such elaborate construction of rights.

A factor that adds to this burden is the involvement of the Government as a respondent in a dispute. One of the most unique and the proudest features that is exclusive to the Constitution of India is that it provides for a fundamental right to approach the Supreme Court for Constitutional remedies against the State (Article 32 of the Constitution). Given the mandate of the Constitution to the Supreme Court to enable "complete justice" (refer Article 142 of the Constitution), this fundamental right to access judicial remedies assumes a lot of significance. However, a strict understanding of the principle of locus standi would nonetheless dilute the guarantee of this fundamental right. Not every person with a right has the ability to enforce it.

The civil remedies for administrative wrongdoing thus heavily depend upon the action of individual citizens. In such an action, the individual is pitted against the State, always an unequal contest. At his own expense, he must challenge the vast framework of State power with all its resources in personnel, money, and legal talent, by a civil action for a declaratory judgment or for an extraordinary remedy, such as, an injunction