One app for all your study abroad needs
The NCERT Class 11 Political Science Chapter 6: Judiciary from the textbook Indian Constitution at Work explores the pivotal role of the judiciary in upholding the Constitution, protecting fundamental rights, and ensuring justice in India’s democratic framework. It examines the structure and functions of the Supreme Court and High Courts, the significance of judicial independence, judicial review, judicial activism, and public interest litigation (PIL). This section provides detailed solutions to the chapter’s exercise questions, offering clear and concise explanations to help students grasp the judiciary’s role in balancing governance and justice while preparing effectively for exams.
Table of Contents
Explore Notes of Class 11 Political Science: Indian Constitution at Work
NCERT Solutions Class 11 Indian Constitution at Work Chapter 6: Judiciary
This section provides clear solutions for Class 11 Indian Constitution at Work Chapter 6: Judiciary. The detailed explanations below help students understand the subject thoroughly.
Exercise
1. What are the different ways in which the independence of the judiciary is ensured? Choose the odd ones out.
i. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is consulted in the appointment of other judges of Supreme Court.
ii. Judges are generally not removed before the age of retirement.
iii. Judge of a High Court cannot be transferred to another High Court.
iv. Parliament has no say in the appointment of judges.
2. Does independence of the judiciary mean that the judiciary is not accountable to any one? Write your answer in not more than 100 words.
3. What are the different provisions in the constitution in order to maintain the independence of judiciary?
4. Read the news report below and identify the following aspects:
- What is the case about?
- Who has been the beneficiary in the case?
- Who is the petitioner in the case?
- Visualise what would have been the different arguments put forward by the company.
- What arguments would the farmers have put forward?
Supreme Court orders REL to pay Rs 300 crore to Dahanu farmers
Our Corporate Bureau 24 March 2005
Mumbai: The Supreme Court has ordered Reliance Energy to pay Rs. 300 crore to farmers who grow the chikoo fruit in the Dahanu area outside Mumbai. The order comes after the chikoo growers petitioned the court against the pollution caused by Reliance’s thermal power plant.
Dahanu, which is 150 km from Mumbai, was a self-sustaining agricultural and horticultural economy known for its fisheries and forests just over a decade ago, but was devastated in 1989
when a thermal power plant came into operation in the region. The next year, this fertile belt saw its first crop failure. Now, 70 per cent of the crop of what was once the fruit bowl of Maharashtra
is gone. The fisheries have shut and the forest cover has thinned. Farmers and environmentalists say that fly ash from the power plant entered ground water and polluted the entire eco-system.
The Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Authority ordered the thermal station to set up a pollution control unit to reduce sulphur emissions, and in spite of a Supreme Court order backing the order the pollution control plant was not set up even by 2002. In 2003, Reliance acquired the thermal station and re-submitted a schedule for installation process in 2004. As the pollution control plant is still not set up, the Dahanu Taluka Environmental Protection Authority asked Reliance for a bank guarantee of Rs. 300 crores.
5. Read the following news report and,
- Identify the governments at different levels
- Identify the role of Supreme Court
- What elements of the working of judiciary and executive can you identify in it?
- Identify the policy issues, matters related to legislation, implementation and interpretation of the law involved in this case.
Centre, Delhi join hands on CNG issue
By Our Staff Reporter, The Hindu 23 September 2001
NEW DELHI, SEPT. 22. The Centre and the Delhi Government today agreed to jointly approach the Supreme Court this coming week… for phasing out of all non-CNG commercial vehicles in
the Capital. They also decided to seek a dual fuel policy for the city instead of putting the entire transportation system on the single-fuel mode “which was full of dangers and would result in
disaster.’’
It was also decided to discourage the use of CNG by private vehicle owners in the Capital. Both governments would press for allowing the use of 0.05 per cent low sulphur diesel for running of
buses in the Capital. In addition, it would be pleaded before the Court that all commercial vehicles, which fulfil the Euro-II standards, should be allowed to ply in the city. Though both the
Centre and the State would file separate affidavits, these would contain common points. The Centre would also go out and support the Delhi Government’s stand on the issues concerning CNG.
These decisions were taken at a meeting between the Delhi Chief Minister, Ms. Sheila Dikshit, and the Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister, Mr. Ram Naik.
Ms. Dikshit said the Central Government would request the court that in view of the high powered Committee appointed under Dr. R.A. Mashelkar to suggest an “Auto Fuel Policy”’ for the entire country, it would be appropriate to extend the deadline as it was not possible to convert the entire 10,000-odd bus fleet into CNG during the prescribed time frame. The Mashelkar Committee is expected to submit its report within a period of six months.
The Chief Minister said time was required to implement the court directives. Referring to the coordinated approach on the issue, Ms. Dikshit said this would take into account the details
about the number of vehicles to be run on CNG, eliminating long queues outside CNG filling stations, the CNG fuel requirements of Delhi and the ways and means to implement the directive of the court.
The Supreme Court had …refused to relax the only CNG norm for the city’s buses but said it had never insisted on CNG for taxis and auto rickshaws. Mr. Naik said the Centre would insist
on allowing use of low sulphur diesel for buses in Delhi as putting the entire transportation system dependent on CNG could prove to be disastrous. The Capital relied on pipeline supply for CNG and any disruption would throw the public transport system out of gear.
6. The following is a statement about Ecuador. What similarities or differences do you find between this example and the judicial system in India?
“It would be helpful if a body of common law, or judicial precedent, existed that could clarify a journalist’s rights. Unfortunately, Ecuador’s courts don’t work that way. Judges are not forced to
respect the rulings of higher courts in previous cases. Unlike the US, an appellate judge in Ecuador (or elsewhere in South America, for that matter) need not provide a written decision explaining the legal basis of a ruling. A judge may rule one way today and the opposite way, in a similar case, tomorrow, without explaining why.”
7. Read the following statements: Match them with the different jurisdictions the Supreme Court can exercise – Original, Appellate, and Advisory.
- The government wanted to know if it can pass a law about the citizenship status of residents of Pakistan-occupied areas of Jammu and Kashmir.
- In order to resolve the dispute about river Cauvery the government of Tamil Nadu wants to approach the court.
- Court rejected the appeal by people against the eviction from the dam site.
8. In what way can public interest litigation help the poor?
9. Do you think that judicial activism can lead to a conflict between the judiciary and the executive? Why?
10. How is judicial activism related to the protection of fundamental rights? Has it helped in expanding the scope of fundamental rights?
Also Read:
- NCERT Solutions Class 11 Political Science: Political Theory Chapter 7 Nationalism (Free PDF)
- NCERT Solutions Class 11 Political Science Indian Constitution at Work Chapter 2: Rights in the Indian Constitution (Free PDF)
Solutions:
1. The independence of the judiciary is ensured through several constitutional provisions:
- Consultation with Chief Justice: Under Article 124, the President appoints Supreme Court judges in consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI), ensuring judicial input in appointments (i is correct).
- Security of Tenure: Judges cannot be easily removed before retirement except through impeachment (Article 124(4) for the Supreme Court, Article 217 for the High Courts), safeguarding their independence (ii is correct).
- Transfer of Judges: High Court judges can be transferred to another High Court by the President in consultation with the CJI (Article 222), making iii incorrect as it does not ensure independence and is the odd one out.
- Limited Role of Parliament: Parliament has no direct role in appointing judges, as appointments are made by the President in consultation with the judiciary (Article 124, Article 217). However, Parliament can initiate impeachment, so (iv) is partially correct but not entirely accurate.
Odd One Out: iii. A judge of a High Court cannot be transferred to another High Court (this is factually incorrect, as transfers are allowed under Article 222).
2. Independence of the judiciary does not mean it is unaccountable. It ensures the judiciary operates without external pressure from the executive or legislature, safeguarding impartiality (Articles 124, 217). However, accountability is maintained through mechanisms like impeachment for misconduct (Article 124(4)), judicial review ensuring decisions align with the Constitution, and transparency in court proceedings. The judiciary is accountable to the Constitution and the people, balancing independence with responsibility to uphold justice and fundamental rights, preventing arbitrary use of power while maintaining public trust.
3. The Constitution of India includes several provisions to ensure judicial independence:
- Appointment Process: Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and other judges (Articles 124, 217), limiting political interference.
- Security of Tenure: Judges can only be removed through impeachment for proven misbehaviour or incapacity (Article 124(4), Article 218), ensuring stability.
- Fixed Salaries: Salaries and allowances of judges are fixed and charged to the Consolidated Fund of India (Article 125, Article 221), protecting against financial coercion.
- No Post-Retirement Government Posts: Judges are prohibited from practising law in India after retirement (Article 124(7), Article 220), preventing conflicts of interest.
- Power of Judicial Review: The judiciary can review laws and executive actions to ensure constitutional compliance (Article 13), reinforcing its autonomy.
- Separation of Powers: The judiciary operates independently of the legislature and executive, as outlined in the Constitution’s structure. These provisions collectively ensure an impartial and independent judiciary.
4. Here are the answers to the given questions:
- Case About: The case involves chikoo farmers in Dahanu, Mumbai, seeking compensation from Reliance Energy’s thermal power plant for pollution causing crop failure, fishery shutdowns, and environmental damage since 1989.
- Farmers’ Arguments: The farmers likely argued that fly ash from the plant polluted groundwater, devastated agriculture (70% crop loss), and destroyed fisheries and forests, violating their right to livelihood (Article 21). They would cite the Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Authority’s order for a pollution control unit, ignored by Reliance.
- Beneficiary: The chikoo farmers, who received Rs. 300 crore as compensation.
- Petitioner: The chikoo growers of Dahanu.
- Company’s Arguments: Reliance might argue that the pollution control unit was under installation (post-2003 acquisition), delays were logistical, not intentional, and crop losses could be due to other factors like climate or farming practices. They might claim the compensation amount is excessive or that they complied with environmental regulations.
5. Here are the answers to the given questions:
- Governments at Different Levels: The Central Government (Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Ministry) and the Delhi State Government (led by Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit).
- Role of Supreme Court: The Supreme Court enforced environmental regulations by mandating CNG for commercial vehicles in Delhi to curb pollution, but clarified it never insisted on CNG for taxis and auto-rickshaws. It refused to relax the CNG norm for buses, exercising judicial review to ensure compliance with environmental laws.
- Elements of the Judiciary and Executive:
- Judiciary: The Supreme Court’s directive reflects judicial activism, enforcing pollution control measures (Article 21, right to a clean environment). Its refusal to relax deadlines shows its role in upholding public interest.
- Executive: The Centre and Delhi Government collaborated to propose a dual fuel policy and seek an extension, showing executive responsibility in implementing court orders and framing policy.
- Policy Issues, Legislation, Implementation, and Interpretation:
- Policy Issue: Balancing environmental protection with practical transport solutions (CNG vs. low-sulphur diesel).
- Legislation: The case involves environmental laws and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.
- Implementation: Challenges in converting 10,000 buses to CNG within the court’s timeline, requiring executive action.
- Interpretation: The Supreme Court interpreted its CNG mandate as applicable only to buses, clarifying its scope, while the Mashelkar Committee’s Auto Fuel Policy aimed to guide future legislation.
6. Similarities:
- Both India and Ecuador have judicial systems tasked with upholding justice, but specific operational differences exist.
Differences:
- Judicial Precedent: In India, the doctrine of precedent (stare decisis) binds lower courts to follow higher court rulings, especially Supreme Court decisions (Article 141), ensuring consistency. Ecuador’s system lacks binding precedent, allowing judges to rule inconsistently without a legal basis.
- Written Decisions: Indian courts, particularly the Supreme Court and High Courts, provide detailed written judgments explaining legal reasoning, promoting transparency. In Ecuador, appellate judges are not required to provide written decisions, reducing accountability.
- Judicial Independence: India’s Constitution (Articles 124, 217) ensures judicial independence through secure tenure and appointments, while Ecuador’s system appears less structured, potentially affecting impartiality. India’s judiciary is more predictable and accountable due to these mechanisms.
7. Below are the statements with their following jurisdiction:
- Advisory Jurisdiction: The government wanted to know if it could pass a law about the citizenship status of residents of Pakistan-occupied areas of Jammu and Kashmir. Under Article 143, the President can seek the Supreme Court’s advisory opinion on matters of public importance, such as legislative competence.
- Original Jurisdiction: In order to resolve the dispute about the river Cauvery, the government of Tamil Nadu wants to approach the court. Under Article 131, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction to hear disputes between states (e.g., Tamil Nadu and Karnataka over Cauvery water).
- Appellate Jurisdiction: The Court rejected the appeal by the people against the eviction from the dam site. Under Article 136, the Supreme Court hears appeals against High Court judgments, such as this eviction case, exercising its appellate jurisdiction.
8. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) helps the poor by:
- Access to Justice: PIL allows individuals or groups to approach the Supreme Court or High Courts directly (Articles 32, 226) without financial or legal barriers, addressing issues like poverty, education, or health.
- Protecting Rights: It safeguards fundamental rights (e.g., right to life, Article 21) by addressing violations like bonded labour or inadequate shelter.
- Policy Reforms: PILs lead to court directives for welfare measures, such as free education or food security (e.g., PUCL v. Union of India for mid-day meals).
- Environmental Protection: PILs ensure a clean environment (Article 21), benefiting poor communities affected by pollution. For example, the Dahanu farmers’ case secured compensation for livelihood losses. PIL empowers the poor by amplifying their voice and enforcing accountability.
9. Yes, judicial activism can lead to conflict between the judiciary and the executive because:
- Overstepping Roles: Judicial activism involves courts proactively interpreting laws or issuing directives (e.g., CNG case), which the executive may view as encroaching on its policy-making domain (Article 74).
- Policy Interference: Court orders on issues like environmental regulations or reservations can disrupt executive plans, causing friction. For instance, the Supreme Court’s ban on non-CNG vehicles challenged the executive’s transport policy.
- Accountability Tensions: While the judiciary ensures executive accountability (Article 32), excessive activism may be seen as undermining elected authority.
However, such conflicts can strengthen democracy by ensuring checks and balances, provided the judiciary respects constitutional boundaries.
10. Relation to Fundamental Rights: Judicial activism involves courts proactively protecting fundamental rights (Articles 12–35) through expansive interpretations and PILs. The judiciary uses Article 32 (Supreme Court) and Article 226 (High Courts) to address rights violations, ensuring justice.
Expansion of Fundamental Rights:
- Right to Life (Article 21): Judicial activism expanded Article 21 to include rights to a clean environment (MC Mehta v. Union of India), education (Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh), and food security (PUCL v. Union of India).
- PILs: Enabled marginalised groups to seek redress, enhancing access to rights.
- Judicial Review: Courts strike down laws violating fundamental rights (Article 13), reinforcing their scope.
Judicial activism has significantly broadened fundamental rights, making them more inclusive and responsive to societal needs.
Download NCERT Solutions Class 11 Political Science Indian Constitution at Work Chapter 6: Judiciary
You can download the NCERT solutions for Class 11 Indian Constitution at Work Chapter 6: Judiciary. We have provided the free PDF for students below.
Also Read:
- NCERT Notes Class 11 Political Science Indian Constitution at Work Chapter 3: Election and Representation (Free PDF)
- NCERT Class 11 Political Science Chapter 6: Citizenship Notes (Free PDF)
Download the Solutions of Other Chapters of Class 11 Political Science: Indian Constitution at Work
Related Reads
For more topics, follow LeverageEdu NCERT Study Material today!
