Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-16T00:03:34.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Courts and Socioeconomic Rights in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2009

By
Shylashri Shankar  and
Pratap Bhanu Mehta
Edited by
Varun Gauri  and
Daniel M. Brinks
Varun Gauri
Affiliation:
The World Bank
Get access

Summary

“Compelling action by authorities of the states through the power of mandamus is an inherent power vested in the judiciary,” said India's Prime Minister, but warned that “substituting mandamus with a takeover of the functions of another organ may, at times, become a case of over-reach…these are all delicate issues which need to be addressed cautiously.” Manmohan Singh was speaking at a conference of regional chief ministers and high court chief justices in April 2007. A similar point was made by a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in March 2007 who cautioned the courts on legitimate and illegitimate intervention; and also by the Speaker of the legislature who said, “I will be failing in my duty if I do not point out that there has been an encroachment in the legislative arena.” These cautionary words from the heads of the legislature, executive, and the judiciary imply that the Indian courts have not just been activist, but over-activist. Is that true?

In the last two decades, the higher judiciary in India transformed non-justiciable economic and social rights such as basic education, health, food, shelter, speedy trial, privacy, anti–child labor, and equal wages for equal work into legally enforceable rights. In a famous judgment on the right to education, the judges even said that a right could be treated as fundamental even if it was not present in the fundamental rights section of the constitution.

Type
Chapter
Information
Courting Social Justice
Judicial Enforcement of Social and Economic Rights in the Developing World
 , pp. 146 - 182
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andhyrarujina, T. R. 1992. Judicial activism and constitutional democracy in India. New Delhi: M. N. Tripathi Private Ltd.Google Scholar
Austin, G. 2000. The Supreme Court and custody of the constitution. In Kirpal, B. N. et al (eds.). Supreme but not infallible: Essays in honour of the Supreme Court of India (pp. 1–15). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, G. 1996. The Indian constitution: Cornerstone of a nation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Barak, A. 2002. A judge on judging – The role of a supreme court in a democracy. Harvard Law Review 116: 16–162.Google Scholar
Baruka, G. C. 2007. Contemporary views on access to justice in India. In Hazra, A. K. and Debroy, B. (eds.), Judicial reforms in India - Issues and aspects (pp. 101–18). New Delhi: Academic Foundation.Google Scholar
Baxi, U. 1980. Indian supreme court and politics. Delhi: Eastern Book Company.Google Scholar
Baxi, U. 1985. Taking suffering seriously: Social action litigation in the Supreme Court of India. In Dhavan, R. S. R. and Khurshid, S. (eds.), Judges and the judicial power (pp. 289–315). Bombay: Tripathi.Google Scholar
Baxi, U. 2002. The (im)possibility of constitutional justice: Seismographic notes on Indian constitutionalism. In Hasan, E. S. Z. and Sudarshan, R. (eds.), India's living constitution – Ideas, practices, and controversies (pp. 31–63). New Delhi: Permanent Black.Google Scholar
Baxi, U. 2007. The rule of law in India. SUR 6: 7–27.Google Scholar
Bhandari, L. 2006. Class monitor needed. Indian Express, October 20, http://www.indianexpress.com/story/14984-2.html.
Cameron, C. M. 2002. Judicial independence: How can you tell it when you see it? And, who cares? In Burbank, S. B. and Friedman, B. (eds.), Judicial independence at the crossroads: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 134–147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhry, S., and Hunter, C. E.. 2003. Measuring judicial activism on the Supreme Court of Canada: A comment on Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v. Nape. McGill Law Journal 48: 525–562.Google Scholar
Clayton, C. W., and Gillman, H., eds. 1999. The Supreme Court in American politics: New institutionalist interpretations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cover, R. 1983. Nomos and narrative. Harvard Law Review 97: 4–68.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. 1957. Decision-making in a democracy: The Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. Journal of Public Law VI,(2): 279–95.Google Scholar
Dam, S. 2005. Lawmaking beyond lawmakers: Understanding the little right and the great wrong. Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 13: 109.Google Scholar
Das, G. 1987. Supreme court in quest of identity. Lucknow, India: Eastern Book Company.Google Scholar
Davis, D. (1992). The case against inclusion of socio-economic rights in a bill of rights except as directive principles. South African Journal on Human Rights 8: 475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desai, A. and Muralidhar, S.. 2000. Public interest litigation: Potential and problems. In Kirpal, B. N. et al (eds.). Supreme but not infallible: Essays in honour of the Supreme Court of India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dhavan, R. 1977. The Supreme Court of India: A socio-legal analysis of its juristic techniques. Bombay: N. M. Tripathi.Google Scholar
Dhavan, R. 1980. Justice on trial: The Supreme Court today. Allahabad, India: A. H. Wheeler & Co.Google Scholar
Dreze, J. 2003. Hunger admidst plenty. India Together, December 2003, http://www.indiatogether.org/2003/dec/pov-foodsec.htm
Dua, B. D. 1983. A study in executive-judicial conflict: The Indian case. Asian Survey 23(4): 463–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, R. 1986. Law's empire. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R. 1999. Taking rights seriously. Delhi: Universal Law.Google Scholar
Epp, C. 1998. The rights revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, L., ed. 1995. Contemplating courts. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.CrossRef
Epstein, L., and Knight, J.. 1998. The choices justices make. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Feeley, M., and Rubin, E.. 1998. Judicial policy making and the modern state: How the courts reformed America's prisons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, J. 1999. Independent judges, dependent judiciary: Explaining judicial independence. Southern California Law Review 72(2–3): 353–84.Google Scholar
Forbath, W. E. 1994. Why is this rights talk different from all other rights talk? Demoting the court and reimagining the constitution. Stanford Law Review 46: 1771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadbois, G. H. 1968. Indian Supreme Court judges – A portrait. Law & Society Review 3: 317–36.Google Scholar
Gadbois, G. H. 1977. Indian judicial behaviour. Economic and Political Weekly, 149–66.Google Scholar
Gadbois, G. H. 1985. The Supreme Court of India as a political institution. In Judges and the judicial power, Dhavan, R. Sudarshan Rajeev and Khurshid, Salman (eds.). Bombay: Sweet and Maxwell.Google Scholar
Gajendragadkar, P. B. 1965. Law, liberty and social justice. Bombay: New Age Printing Press.Google Scholar
Galanter, M. 1997. Law and society in modern India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Galanter, M., and Krishnan, J. K.. 2004. Bread for the poor: Access to justice and the rights of the needy in India. Hastings Law Journal 55: 789–834.Google Scholar
Gillman, H. 2002. How political parties can use the courts to advance their agendas: Federal courts in the United States, 1875–1891. American Political Science Review 96: 511–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, L. F. 2004. From democracy to juristocracy. Law and Society Review 38: 611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazra, A. and Debroy, B., editors. 2006. Judicial reforms in India: Issues and aspects. New Delhi: Academic Foundation.
Helmke, G. 2002. The logic of strategic defection: Court-executive relations in Argentina under dictatorship and democracy. American Political Science Review 96(2): 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschl, R. 2000. The political origins of judicial empowerment through constitutionalization: Lessons from four constitutional revolutions. Law and Social Inquiry 25(1): 91–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschl, R. 2004. Towards juristocracy – The origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hirschl, R., Tate, N., and Ginsburg, T.. 2003. Judicial review in new democracies – Constitutional courts in Asian cases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Iyer, K. 1992. Justice at crossroads. New Delhi: Deep and Deep.Google Scholar
Iyer, K. 1987. Our courts on trial. New Delhi: B. R. Publishing.Google Scholar
Kashyap, S. 1994. Our constitution. Delh: National Book Trust.Google Scholar
Krishnan, J. 2006. Lawyering for a cause and experiences from abroad. California Law Review (March) 574–615.Google Scholar
Levi, E. H. 1949. An introduction to legal reasoning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, K. 1931. Some realism about realism – Responding to Dean Pound. Harvard Law Review 44: 122–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCann, M. W., and Houseman, G. L., eds. 1989. Judging the constitution – Critical essays on judicial lawmaking. London: Scott, Foreman/Little, Brown Series in Political Science.
Mehta, P. B. 2005. India's judiciary: The promise of uncertainty. In Kapur, D. and Mehta, P. B. (eds.), Public institutions in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Misra, R., Chatterjee, R., and Rao, S.. 2003. India health report. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Muralidhar, S. 2002. Implementation of court orders in the area of economic, social and cultural rights: An overview of the experience of the Indian judiciary. Paper presented at the First South Asian Regional Judicial Colloquium on Access to Justice, New Delhi, November 1–3.
Rao, K. S. 1974. Social justice and law. First Shyama Prasad Mookerjee memorial lectures. New Delhi: National Publishing House.Google Scholar
Rau, B. N. 1960. India's constitution in the making. Edited by Rao, B. Shiva. Bombay: Orient Longmans.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, G. N. 1991. The hollow hope: Can courts bring about social change?Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, G. N. 1992. Judicial independence and the reality of political power. Review of Politics 54: 369–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, G. N. 1998. Knowledge and desire: Thinking about courts and social change. In Schultz, D., Leveraging the law – Using the courts to achieve social change. New York: Peter LangGoogle Scholar
Rosencranz, A., and Jackson, M.. 2003. The Delhi pollution case: The Supreme Court of India and the limits of judicial power. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 28: 223.Google Scholar
Sainath, P. 2006. The health of nations. India Together, February 18, http://www.indiatogether.org/2006/jan/psa-health.htm.
Sathe, S. P. 2002a. Judicial activism in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sathe, S. P. 2002b. Judicial enforcement of socio-economic and cultural rights. Paper presented at the First South Asian Regional Judicial Colloquium on Access to Justice, New Delhi, November 1–3.
Scheingold, S. 1989. Constitutional rights and social change: Civil rights in perspective. In McCann, M. W. and Houseman, G. L. (eds.), Judging the constitution – Critical essays on judicial lawmaking. London: Scott, Foreman/Little, Brown Series in Political Science.Google Scholar
Seervai, H. M. 1983. Constitutional law of India (3rd ed.). New Delhi: N.M. Tripathy.Google Scholar
Segal, J., and Spaeth, H.. 2002. The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A., and Dreze, J.. 1995. India: Development and participation. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Setalvad, A. M. 2000. The Supreme Court on human rights and social justice: Changing perspectives. In Kirpal, B. N. et al (eds.). Supreme but not infallible: Essays in honour of the Supreme Court of India (pp. 232–255). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, M., and Sweet, A. S.. 2002. On law, politics and judicialization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shue, H. 1980. Basic rights: Subsistence, affluence, and U.S. foreign policy (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sousa, M. 2006. Judicial roles in the policy making process and public policy in Latin America. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, August 31.
Sunstein, C. R. 1995. Propter honoris respectum: Rights and their critics. Notre Dame Law Review 70: 727.Google Scholar
Tate, C. N. 1993. Courts and crisis regimes – A theory sketch with Asian case studies. Political Research Quarterly 46(2): 311–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tate, C. N., and Vallinder, T.. 1995. The global expansion of judicial power: The judicialization of politics. In Tate, C. N. and Vallinder, T. (eds.), The global expansion of judicial power (pp. 1–24). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Tushnet, M. 2004. Symposium: Constitutional courts in the field of power politics: Social welfare rights and the forms of judicial review. Texas Law Review 82: 1895.Google Scholar
,UNAIDS. 2003. AIDS Epidemic Update. Available from: data.unaids.org/Publications/IRC-pub06/JC943-EpiUpdate2003_en.pdf.
Verma, J. S. 2007. The Indian polity: Separation of powers. Pandit Kunji Lal Dubey Memorial Lecture. April 26, 2007. Available here: http://speakerloksabha.nic.in/speech/SpeechDetails.asp?SpeechId=212.
Vandenhole, W. 2002. Human rights law, development and social action litigation in India. Asia Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law 2:136–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voigt, S., and Salzberger, E. M.. 2002. Choosing not to choose: When politicians choose to delegate powers. Kyklos 55(2): 289–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×