Is the judiciary a part of the andlsquo;other authorityandrsquo; in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other a...

Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?

a)
No
b)
Yes
c)
Depends on circumstances
d)
None of the above

Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 1...

In Rupa Ashok Hurra v Ashok Hurra[8], the Supreme Court reaffirmed and ruled that no judicial proceeding could be said to violate any fundamental right. It was said to be a settled position of law that superior courts of justice do not fall within the ambit of ‘State’ or other authorities under Article 12. Therefore, it can rightly be said that while courts perform their administrative function, they are within the State’s definition and cannot violate any fundamental rights of the citizen. Still, when they give judicial decisions, they do not come within the meaning of State.

Answered by Glance Learning Institute · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Test: Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles And Fundamental Duties
30 Ques | 25 Min

Start Free Test

View all free CLAT tests

Community Answer

Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 1...

Explanation:

Judiciary as a Part of 'Other Authority' in Art. 12 of the Constitution

The term 'other authority' in Article 12 of the Constitution of India refers to bodies or entities that are not explicitly mentioned as part of the State but perform functions that are akin to those of the State. The judiciary is considered as a part of the 'other authority' in Art. 12 of the Constitution because of the following reasons:

- Functions: The judiciary performs functions that are crucial for upholding the rule of law, protecting fundamental rights, and ensuring justice in society. These functions are similar to those performed by the State.

- Independence: The judiciary is an independent organ of the State that acts as a check on the executive and legislative branches. Its autonomy and authority are essential for maintaining the balance of power in a democratic system.

- Adjudicatory Powers: The judiciary has the power to interpret laws, review the actions of the government, and provide remedies to individuals whose rights have been violated. This adjudicatory role makes it a significant player in the governance structure.

- Constitutional Interpretation: The judiciary plays a crucial role in interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that the actions of the State adhere to the principles and values enshrined in the Constitution. This function underscores its importance as an 'other authority.'

Therefore, based on these reasons, it can be concluded that the judiciary is indeed a part of the 'other authority' in Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court can be invoked under Article 32 of the Constitution for the violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Part - III of the Constitution. Any provision in any Constitution for Fundamental Rights is meaningless unless there are adequate safeguards to ensure enforcement of such provisions. Since the reality of such rights is tested only through the judiciary, the safeguards assume even more importance. In addition, enforcement also depends upon the degree of independence of the Judiciary and the availability of relevant instruments with the executive authority. Indian Constitution, like most of Western Constitutions, lays down certain provisions to ensure the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. However, Article 32 is referred to as the “Constitutional Remedy” for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This provision itself has been included in the Fundamental Rights and hence it cannot be denied to any person. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the most important one, without which the Constitution would be reduced to nullity. It is also referred to as the heart and soul of the Constitution. By including Article 32 in the Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court has been made the protector and guarantor of these Rights. An application made under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, cannot be refused on technical grounds. In addition to the prescribed five types of writs, the Supreme Court may pass any other appropriate order. Moreover, only the questions pertaining to the Fundamental Rights can be determined in proceedings against Article 32. Under Article 32, the Supreme Court may issue a Writ against any person or government within the territory of India. Where the infringement of a Fundamental Right has been established, the Supreme Court cannot refuse relief on the ground that the aggrieved person may have remedy before some other court or under the ordinary law.The relief can also not be denied on the ground that the disputed facts have to be investigated or some evidence has to be collected. Even if an aggrieved person has not asked for a particular Writ, the Supreme Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, may grant the appropriate Writ and may even modify it to suit the exigencies of the case. Normally, only the aggrieved person is allowed to move the Court. But it has been held by the Supreme Court that in social or public interest matters, any one may move the Court. A Public Interest Litigation can be filed before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution or before the High Court of a State under Article 226 of the Constitution under their respective Writ Jurisdictions.What is the correct meaning of the word ‘infringement’?

View answer

The Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court can be invoked under Article 32 of the Constitution for the violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Part - III of the Constitution. Any provision in any Constitution for Fundamental Rights is meaningless unless there are adequate safeguards to ensure enforcement of such provisions. Since the reality of such rights is tested only through the judiciary, the safeguards assume even more importance. In addition, enforcement also depends upon the degree of independence of the Judiciary and the availability of relevant instruments with the executive authority. Indian Constitution, like most of Western Constitutions, lays down certain provisions to ensure the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. However, Article 32 is referred to as the “Constitutional Remedy” for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This provision itself has been included in the Fundamental Rights and hence it cannot be denied to any person. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the most important one, without which the Constitution would be reduced to nullity. It is also referred to as the heart and soul of the Constitution. By including Article 32 in the Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court has been made the protector and guarantor of these Rights. An application made under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, cannot be refused on technical grounds. In addition to the prescribed five types of writs, the Supreme Court may pass any other appropriate order. Moreover, only the questions pertaining to the Fundamental Rights can be determined in proceedings against Article 32. Under Article 32, the Supreme Court may issue a Writ against any person or government within the territory of India. Where the infringement of a Fundamental Right has been established, the Supreme Court cannot refuse relief on the ground that the aggrieved person may have remedy before some other court or under the ordinary law.The relief can also not be denied on the ground that the disputed facts have to be investigated or some evidence has to be collected. Even if an aggrieved person has not asked for a particular Writ, the Supreme Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, may grant the appropriate Writ and may even modify it to suit the exigencies of the case. Normally, only the aggrieved person is allowed to move the Court. But it has been held by the Supreme Court that in social or public interest matters, any one may move the Court. A Public Interest Litigation can be filed before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution or before the High Court of a State under Article 226 of the Constitution under their respective Writ Jurisdictions.All of the following can be inferred from the passage except

View answer

Passage:The Office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is a ‘public authority’ under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, a five-judge [2] led by Chief Justice of India [1] declared on Wednesday. The main judgment of the [2] authored by Justice Sanjiv Khanna said the Supreme Court is a ‘public authority’ and the office of the CJI is part and parcel of the institution. Hence, if the Supreme Court is a public authority, so is the office of the CJI.Justice Khanna, who shared his judgment with Chief Justice [1] and Justice Deepak Gupta, observed that “transparency and accountability should go hand-in-hand”. Increased transparency under RTI was no threat to judicial independence, he held. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, in his separate and concurring opinion, eloquently observed that “judicial independence is not secured by the secrecy of cloistered halls”. The Bench, however, agreed, in one voice, that the right to know under RTI was not absolute. The right to know of a citizen ought to be balanced with the right to privacy of individual judges. Hence, on this aspect, Justice Khanna held that personal information of judges should only be divulged under RTI if such disclosure served the larger public interest.Q.The name given to benches of the Supreme Court of India that have at least five judges, who sit “for the purpose of deciding any case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of [the] Constitution or for the purpose of hearing any reference under Article 143” has been replaced with ‘[2]’ in the passage above. What is ‘[2]’?

View answer

Passage:The role of India’s judiciary in securing the enforcement of rights outside statute law but within the Constitutional mandate promoted public interest litigation (PIL) in the 1980s. PIL is a broad-based, people-orientated approach, which promotes access to justice through judge-made processes and remedies. PIL revolutionized the judicial procedure by introducing three procedural innovations: (i) expanded standing; (ii) non-adversarial procedure; and (iii) wider remedial action as a result of expanded frontiers of fundamental rights, particularly the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Environmental PIL is a product of the Courts’ response to inaction by the state or the wrongful action of state agencies in performing their statutory duties, which has resulted in endangering or impairing the quality of life of people as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The state is under a duty to enforce this Constitutional right by devising and implementing a coherent and coordinated programme for the well-being of the population. Failure on the part of the state prompted judges to issue brief interim directions entitled ‘continuing mandamus’. In this context, PIL is considered a ‘wheel of transformation’ providing access to justice, inter alia, to victims of environmental degradation. In the past two decades Courts have locked together human rights and the environment and entertained PIL petitions from various quarters seeking remedies, including the issuing of guidelines and directions in the absence of legislation. The proactive judiciary, acting as ‘amicus environment’, has produced a major shift in the environmental landscape of India and has also declared and promoted the principles ofsustainable development and the precautionary and the polluter pays principles as elements of fundamental law.The active engagement of the Indian judiciary in imparting environmental justice nonetheless raised concerns about the effectiveness of PIL. This was in relation to the rapidly increasing number of petitions, complex technical and scientific issues, unrealistic Court directions, and individual judicial preferences – often personality driven rather than reflecting collective institutionalized adjudication – as well as the issue of creeping jurisdiction. Although the Supreme Court created a procedure that allowed indigents and concerned citizens to access the Courts via PIL, it did not prove to be the much heralded ‘magic bullet’.Q.What is the meaning of the word ‘PIL’?

View answer

The Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court can be invoked under Article 32 of the Constitution for the violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Part – III of the Constitution. Any provision in any Constitution for Fundamental Rights is meaningless unless there are adequate safeguards to ensure enforcement of such provisions. Since the reality of such rights is tested only through the judiciary, the safeguards assume even more importance. In addition, enforcement also depends upon the degree of independence of the Judiciary and the availability of relevant instruments with the executive authority. Indian Constitution, like most of Western Constitutions, lays down certain provisions to ensure the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.However, Article 32 is referred to as the “Constitutional Remedy” for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This provision itself has been included in the Fundamental Rights and hence it cannot be denied to any person. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the most important one, without which the Constitution would be reduced to nullity. It is also referred to as the heart and soul of the Constitution. By including Article 32 in the Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court has been made the protector and guarantor of these Rights. An application made under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, cannot be refused on technical grounds. In addition to the prescribed five types of writs, the Supreme Court may pass any other appropriate order. Moreover, only the questions pertaining to the Fundamental Rights can be determined in proceedings against Article 32. Under Article 32, the Supreme Court may issue a Writ against any person or government within the territory of India. Where the infringement of a Fundamental Right has been established, the Supreme Court cannot refuse relief on the ground that the aggrieved person may have remedy before some other court or under the ordinary law.The relief can also not be denied on the ground that the disputed facts have to be investigated or some evidence has to be collected. Even if an aggrieved person has not asked for a particular Writ, the Supreme Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, may grant the appropriate Writ and may even modify it to suit the exigencies of the case. Normally, only the aggrieved person is allowed to move the Court. But it has been held by the Supreme Court that in social or public interest matters, any one may move the Court. A Public Interest Litigation can be filed before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution or before the High Court of a State under Article 226 of the Constitution under their respective Writ Jurisdictions.Q. All of the following can be inferred from the passage except

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Crash Course for CLAT

CLAT Mock Test Series 2026

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Is the judiciary a part of the ‘other authority’ in Art. 12 of the Constitution?a)Nob)Yesc)Depends on circumstancesd)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam