Topic– Separation of powers between various organs dispute redressal mechanisms and institutions.
2) The tension between the Executive and Judiciary isn’t new but it has assumed a different dimension in recent years. Critically analyze.(250 words)
Critically analyze-here we have to examine methodically the structure or nature of the topic by separating it into component parts, and present them as a whole in a summary.
Key demand of the question.
The question wants us to dig deep into the tussle between the judiciary and the executive. It wants us to analyze the brief history of the tussle and also the new dimensions it has assumed recently.
Structure of the answer
Introduction– write a few introductory lines about the separation of powers between various organs of the state as envisaged by the constitution.
- Discuss briefly the history of the judiciary-executive tussle in India. E.g The Constituent Assembly was gripped by a question: should the power to remove superior judges be vested in the President or Parliament? In the end, the view of Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar, prevailed and the members decided that both Houses of Parliament, while acting on an impeachment notice, would exercise this power, if at all. For, few members believed that this provision would ever be used; Seventy years later, that very provision is at the heart of a tussle between the judiciary and the executive; Mention the Kameshwar Singh vs State of Bihar case; Golaknath Case; Kesavananda Bharati case; second and third judges cases etc.
- Discuss the new developments in this direction, which have given a different dimension to the issue. E.g In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC legislation as unconstitutional; the CJI facing an impeachment motion, the lack of cohesion among senior Supreme Court judges, and the Executive asserting itself etc.
Conclusion– based on your discussion, form a fair and a balanced conclusion on the given issue.