Module 35. Judiciary, Judicial Mechanism, ADR

The Judiciary of India forms an integral part of the democratic framework and acts as the guardian of the Constitution. It upholds the rule of law, protects fundamental rights, and ensures justice through an independent system of courts. The judiciary not only interprets and applies laws but also safeguards the balance of power among the legislative and executive branches. Its structure and functions are established under Part V (Articles 124–147) and Part VI (Articles 214–237) of the Constitution.

Structure of the Judiciary

India possesses a single integrated judicial system with a three-tier hierarchy — the Supreme Court, High Courts, and Subordinate Courts. This uniform structure ensures consistency in law interpretation and facilitates appeals from lower to higher courts.

The Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court, established on 28 January 1950, is the apex judicial authority under Article 124 of the Constitution. It comprises the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and other judges, whose number is determined by Parliament (currently 34 judges). The President appoints the judges on the recommendation of the Collegium System, which includes the CJI and senior judges of the Supreme Court.
The Court has three types of jurisdictions:

• Original Jurisdiction (Article 131) – Disputes between the Union and states or among states.
• Appellate Jurisdiction (Articles 132–134A) – Appeals against judgments of High Courts in civil, criminal, or constitutional matters.
• Advisory Jurisdiction (Article 143) – The President may seek the Supreme Court’s opinion on questions of law or fact.

It also functions as the guardian of the Constitution under Article 32, which empowers it to issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

High Courts

Every state or group of states has a High Court under Articles 214–231. High Courts are the highest judicial bodies at the state level. The Chief Justice and judges are appointed by the President after consultation with the CJI and the Governor of the state.
High Courts possess original, appellate, and supervisory jurisdiction. They hear appeals from lower courts, have authority over revenue and criminal cases, and issue writs under Article 226 for the enforcement of rights. High Courts also exercise control over the subordinate judiciary within their territories.

Subordinate Courts

Below the High Courts lie the district and subordinate courts, organised under the control of state governments and High Courts. The principal court of original jurisdiction in a district is the District Court, presided over by a District Judge. Other subordinate courts include Civil Courts, Criminal Courts (Sessions Courts), Family Courts, and Revenue Courts.
Judges of these courts are appointed by the Governor in consultation with the High Court. These courts deal with cases at the grassroots level and ensure accessible justice to the public.

Judicial Review and Independence of Judiciary

The doctrine of judicial review empowers the courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders. If any law is found to violate the Constitution, the judiciary can declare it null and void. This power, though not explicitly mentioned, is derived from Articles 13, 32, and 226.
Landmark cases that strengthened judicial review include:

• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Established the Basic Structure Doctrine; Parliament cannot alter the essential features of the Constitution.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) – Upheld judicial review as part of the basic structure.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) – Ensured harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.

The independence of the judiciary is safeguarded through various constitutional provisions such as the security of tenure, fixed service conditions, and separation of powers. Judges can be removed only by impeachment under Article 124(4) for proven misbehaviour or incapacity.

Judicial Activism and Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Since the late 1970s, the Indian judiciary has evolved a proactive role through Judicial Activism. This approach allows courts to address issues of public concern, especially when executive or legislative actions fail to deliver justice.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL), pioneered by Justice P. N. Bhagwati and Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, enables individuals or groups to file petitions on behalf of others whose rights have been violated. PILs have been instrumental in protecting the environment, labour rights, and women’s rights, among others.
Notable cases include:

• M. C. Mehta v. Union of India – Led to several environmental reforms.
• Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar – Highlighted the right to speedy trial for undertrials.
• Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan – Established guidelines against sexual harassment at the workplace.

While judicial activism has expanded access to justice, critics argue that excessive interference may lead to judicial overreach, blurring the boundaries between judicial and executive domains.

Judicial Mechanism and Court Procedures

The judicial mechanism refers to the procedural system through which courts administer justice. It includes filing petitions, framing of issues, evidence collection, trial, and delivery of judgment. Courts operate based on Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, and Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973.
Key aspects of judicial mechanism include:

• Hierarchy and Appeals – Litigants can appeal to higher courts against lower court decisions.
• Writ Jurisdiction – Empowerment of High Courts and Supreme Court to enforce rights through writs like Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warranto.
• Contempt of Court (Article 129 & 215) – Ensures respect and compliance with judicial orders.
• Judicial Commissions and Tribunals – Bodies such as National Green Tribunal (NGT) and Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) provide specialised dispute resolution in specific domains.

Modern judicial reforms focus on digitisation of court records, e-courts projects, and case management systems to reduce pendency and increase efficiency.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) offers non-judicial means for settling disputes outside traditional courts. Recognised under Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code, ADR mechanisms are designed to reduce the burden on courts and provide speedy, cost-effective justice.
The major forms of ADR include:

1. Arbitration – Parties agree to submit disputes to an impartial arbitrator whose decision (award) is binding. Governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. Conciliation – A conciliator assists parties in reaching an amicable settlement, without imposing a decision.
3. Mediation – Involves a neutral mediator facilitating dialogue to achieve voluntary resolution.
4. Negotiation – Direct discussion between parties without a third party’s involvement.
5. Lok Adalats (People’s Courts) – Established under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, they settle cases through compromise and have the status of civil court decrees.

ADR mechanisms have gained importance due to their confidentiality, flexibility, and lower costs. They are particularly effective in commercial, family, and labour disputes. The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Acts of 2015 and 2019 strengthened India’s position as a global arbitration hub.