NCERT Solutions for Class 11 Pol Science Chapter 6 Judiciary न्यायपालिका
Question 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.
न्यायपालिका की स्वतंत्रता को सुनिश्चित करने के विभिन्न तरीके कौन-कौन से हैं? निम्नलिखित में जो बेमेल हो उसे छाँटें।
(क) सर्वोच्च न्यायालय के अन्य न्यायाधीशों की नियुक्ति में सर्वोच्च न्यायालय के मुख्य न्यायाधीश से सलाह ली जाती है।
(ख) न्यायाधीशों को अमूमन अवकाश प्राप्ति की आयु से पहले नहीं हटाया जाता।
(ग) उच्च न्यायालय के न्यायाधीश का तबादला दूसरे उच्च न्यायालय में नहीं किया जा सकता।
(घ) न्यायाधीशों की नियुक्ति में संसद की दखल नहीं है।
Answer
iii. Judge of a High Court cannot be transferred to another High Court.
Explanation: High Court judges can be transferred from one High Court to another by the President, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India. Therefore, statement (3) is incorrect.
(ग) उच्च न्यायालय के न्यायाधीश का तबादला दूसरे उच्च न्यायालय में नहीं किया जा सकता।
व्याख्या: उच्च न्यायालय के न्यायाधीश का एक उच्च न्यायालय से दूसरे उच्च न्यायालय में तबादला किया जा सकता है। इसलिए (ग) गलत कथन है।
Question 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.
क्या न्यायपालिका की स्वतंत्रता का अर्थ यह है कि न्यायपालिका किसी के प्रति जवाबदेह नहीं है। अपना उत्तर अधिकतम 100 शब्दों में लिखें।
Answer
No, independence of the judiciary does not mean that it is not accountable to anyone. The judiciary is independent so that it can work without pressure or interference from the legislature and the executive. However, judges are expected to follow the Constitution and laws of the country. They can also be removed through the constitutional process of impeachment for proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Thus, judicial independence means freedom from undue interference, not absence of accountability.
नहीं, न्यायपालिका की स्वतंत्रता का अर्थ यह नहीं है कि वह किसी के प्रति जवाबदेह नहीं है। न्यायपालिका को स्वतंत्र रखा गया है ताकि वह विधायिका और कार्यपालिका के दबाव या हस्तक्षेप के बिना कार्य कर सके। फिर भी न्यायाधीशों को संविधान और कानूनों का पालन करना होता है। सिद्ध कदाचार या अक्षमता के आधार पर संवैधानिक प्रक्रिया द्वारा उन्हें हटाया भी जा सकता है। अतः न्यायिक स्वतंत्रता का अर्थ अनुचित हस्तक्षेप से स्वतंत्रता है, जवाबदेही से मुक्ति नहीं।
Question 3:
What are the different provisions in the constitution in order to maintain the independence of judiciary?
न्यायपालिका की स्वतंत्रता को बनाए रखने के लिए संविधान के विभिन्न प्रावधान कौन-कौन से हैं?
Answer
The Constitution provides several safeguards for the independence of the judiciary:
- Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts have security of tenure and cannot be removed easily.
- They can be removed only through a special procedure of impeachment by Parliament.
- Their salaries and allowances are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India and cannot be reduced during their term, except under financial emergency.
- Parliament cannot discuss the conduct of judges except during the removal process.
- The judiciary has the power to interpret the Constitution and review laws passed by the legislature.
न्यायपालिका की स्वतंत्रता बनाए रखने के लिए संविधान में कई प्रावधान किए गए हैं:
- सर्वोच्च न्यायालय और उच्च न्यायालय के न्यायाधीशों को पद की सुरक्षा प्राप्त है और उन्हें आसानी से हटाया नहीं जा सकता।
- उन्हें केवल संसद की विशेष महाभियोग प्रक्रिया द्वारा हटाया जा सकता है।
- उनके वेतन और भत्ते भारत की संचित निधि पर भारित होते हैं और उनके कार्यकाल के दौरान सामान्यतः कम नहीं किए जा सकते।
- संसद में न्यायाधीशों के आचरण पर चर्चा उनके हटाने की प्रक्रिया के अलावा नहीं की जा सकती।
- न्यायपालिका को संविधान की व्याख्या और न्यायिक पुनरावलोकन की शक्ति प्राप्त है।
Question 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.
Question 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
Question 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.”
Question 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.
निम्नलिखित कथनों को पढ़िए और सर्वोच्च न्यायालय द्वारा अमल में लाए जाने वाले विभिन्न क्षेत्राधिकार; मसलन – मूल, अपीली और परामर्शकारी – से इनका मिलान कीजिए।
(क) सरकार जानना चाहती थी कि क्या वह पाकिस्तान – अधिकृत जम्मू-कश्मीर के निवासियों को नागरिकता के संबंध में कानून पारित कर सकती है।
(ख) कावेरी नदी के जल विवाद के समाधान के लिए तमिलनाडु सरकार अदालत की शरण लेना चाहती है।
(ग) बाँध स्थल से हटाए जाने के विरुद्ध लोगों द्वारा की गई अपील को अदालत ने ठुकरा दिया।
Answer
Question 8:
In what way can public interest litigation help the poor?
जनहित याचिका किस तरह गरीबों की मदद कर सकती है?
Answer
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can help poor and disadvantaged people who may not have the money or resources to approach the courts themselves. Any person or organisation can approach the court on their behalf when their rights are violated. PIL has helped bring attention to issues such as bonded labour, child labour, exploitation and poor living conditions. Thus, PIL makes justice more accessible to weaker sections of society.
जनहित याचिका (PIL) गरीब और वंचित लोगों की मदद कर सकती है, क्योंकि उनके पास स्वयं न्यायालय जाने के लिए पर्याप्त धन या साधन नहीं होते। कोई भी व्यक्ति या संस्था उनके अधिकारों के उल्लंघन के मामले में उनकी ओर से न्यायालय जा सकती है। जनहित याचिका ने बंधुआ मजदूरी, बाल मजदूरी, शोषण और खराब जीवन-स्थितियों जैसे मुद्दों को न्यायालय के सामने लाने में मदद की है। इससे कमजोर वर्गों के लिए न्याय प्राप्त करना आसान होता है।
Question 9:
Do you think that judicial activism can lead to a conflict between the judiciary and the executive? Why?
क्या आप मानते हैं कि न्यायिक सक्रियता से न्यायपालिका और कार्यपालिका में विरोध पनप सकता है? क्यों?
Answer
Yes, judicial activism can sometimes lead to a conflict between the judiciary and the executive. Judicial activism means that courts take an active role in protecting rights and addressing matters of public concern. When the judiciary gives directions in areas that are normally handled by the executive, the executive may feel that the court is interfering in its functions. However, judicial activism can also help ensure that constitutional rights and the rule of law are protected.
हाँ, न्यायिक सक्रियता से कभी-कभी न्यायपालिका और कार्यपालिका के बीच विरोध उत्पन्न हो सकता है। न्यायिक सक्रियता का अर्थ है कि न्यायालय अधिकारों की रक्षा और जनहित से जुड़े मामलों में सक्रिय भूमिका निभाए। जब न्यायपालिका ऐसे मामलों में निर्देश देती है जो सामान्यतः कार्यपालिका के अधिकार क्षेत्र में आते हैं, तो कार्यपालिका इसे अपने कार्यों में हस्तक्षेप मान सकती है। फिर भी न्यायिक सक्रियता संवैधानिक अधिकारों और कानून के शासन की रक्षा करने में सहायक हो सकती है।
Question 10:
How is judicial activism related to the protection of fundamental rights? Has it helped in expanding the scope of fundamental rights?
न्यायिक सक्रियता मौलिक अधिकारों की सुरक्षा से किस रूप में जुड़ी है? क्या इससे मौलिक अधिकारों के विषय-क्षेत्र को बढ़ाने में मदद मिली है?
Answer
Judicial activism has played an important role in protecting fundamental rights. Through judicial interpretation, the courts have given a wider meaning to several fundamental rights. For example, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Right to Life under Article 21 to include various aspects necessary for a dignified life, such as the right to livelihood, education and a clean environment. Thus, judicial activism has helped expand the practical scope of fundamental rights and provided greater protection to citizens.
न्यायिक सक्रियता ने मौलिक अधिकारों की रक्षा में महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका निभाई है। न्यायालयों ने अपनी व्याख्या के माध्यम से कई मौलिक अधिकारों का व्यापक अर्थ स्पष्ट किया है। उदाहरण के लिए, सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने अनुच्छेद 21 के जीवन के अधिकार की व्यापक व्याख्या करते हुए सम्मानजनक जीवन के लिए आवश्यक विभिन्न पहलुओं को इसमें शामिल किया है, जैसे आजीविका, शिक्षा और स्वच्छ पर्यावरण का अधिकार। इस प्रकार, न्यायिक सक्रियता ने मौलिक अधिकारों के व्यावहारिक क्षेत्र को विस्तृत करने और नागरिकों को अधिक सुरक्षा देने में मदद की है।
NCERT Solutions for Class 11 Pol Science Chapter 6 Judiciary न्यायपालिका
