Ref. LcI post@
The reported SC judgment , last in the series, simply restates once again the long established rudimentary principle. As has been rightly emphasised time and again by the apex court, the adjudicatory powers of courts ought not to, under any pretext, more so donning the cloak of ‘equity', travel beyond the permitted realm of 'interpretation' in its profound sense. Saying it differently, courts cannot, under any circumstance, encroach upon the realm of 'legislation', which is the sole prerogative of the 'legislature'. Be that as it should, it is really deplorable that, one does come across instances, not infrequently, especially in recent times, appellate and court decisions being handed down in complete negation of the stated principle, which has its root in the country's constitutional law. No wonder, litigation has become growingly inevitable even in matters on which the governing law is loud and clear, or 'covered' on all fours by 'precedents'. There is no gainsaying that, amendments of, or tinkering with in any manner, any extant enactment, or rules or regulations, resorted to as a matter of course, off and on, by the legislative bodies, be they at the centre or in the states, at the instance of the 'executive', have been, as is the common perception, responsible, in no small measure, for the aforesaid state of affairs.
Law, not equity must prevail: SCDoes this not (?) bear out the one and only good and sane reason for justifying, -the common perception that, -Our legal system is messed up, and is bound to continue to be so done, the entire blame being traceable to and resting with the unbending and unbound mindset of the species - 'vested interests'. So also, the age old saying /belief that - 'LAW IS AN ASS' |
The reported SC judgment , last in the series, simply restates once again the long established rudimentary principle. As has been rightly emphasised time and again by the apex court, the adjudicatory powers of courts ought not to, under any pretext, more so donning the cloak of ‘equity', travel beyond the permitted realm of 'interpretation' in its profound sense. Saying it differently, courts cannot, under any circumstance, encroach upon the realm of 'legislation', which is the sole prerogative of the 'legislature'. Be that as it should, it is really deplorable that, one does come across instances, not infrequently, especially in recent times, appellate and court decisions being handed down in complete negation of the stated principle, which has its root in the country's constitutional law. No wonder, litigation has become growingly inevitable even in matters on which the governing law is loud and clear, or 'covered' on all fours by 'precedents'. There is no gainsaying that, amendments of, or tinkering with in any manner, any extant enactment, or rules or regulations, resorted to as a matter of course, off and on, by the legislative bodies, be they at the centre or in the states, at the instance of the 'executive', have been, as is the common perception, responsible, in no small measure, for the aforesaid state of affairs.
No comments:
Post a Comment