Are you interested in Joining program?

Home / Polity / SC Clarifies Legislature’s Power in Nandini Sundar Case

SC Clarifies Legislature’s Power in Nandini Sundar Case

Why in NEWS

The Supreme Court ruling in the Nandini Sundar vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2012) reaffirmed the authority of state legislatures to enact new laws, even in response to judicial directives, as long as they remain within constitutional bounds.

Key Terms and Concepts

TermMeaning
Special Police Officers (SPOs)Civilian recruits used for security operations, often lacking formal police training
Articles 14 and 21Right to equality and right to life and personal liberty under the Indian Constitution
Contempt of CourtDisobedience or disrespect towards court orders or its authority
Ultra viresBeyond the legal powers or authority granted
Doctrine of Separation of PowersPrinciple that divides responsibilities among legislature, executive, and judiciary

Background of the Case

YearEvent
2011SC ordered Chhattisgarh to stop using SPOs in anti-Maoist ops, calling it unconstitutional
2012State passed Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Forces Act, creating similar auxiliary forces
PetitionFiled claiming this new law violated SC’s 2011 ruling

Supreme Court Ruling Highlights

PointClarification
Contempt RejectedChhattisgarh was held to have complied with earlier SC orders
Legislative AuthorityStates can pass new laws unless they are unconstitutional or beyond their powers
Separation of PowersCourts cannot prevent legislatures from passing laws; laws can only be challenged on validity grounds
Legal PrecedentReinforced in Indian Aluminium Co. vs. State of Kerala (1996) — legislatures can nullify judgments by removing the basis of law, not by direct overruling

About Salwa Judum and Koya Commandos

TermDescription
Salwa JudumAnti-Naxalite civilian militia initiated in 2005 with state backing
Koya CommandosTribal youth from the Koya tribe, recruited as SPOs under Salwa Judum for armed operations

In a nutshell

Memory Code: J-U-D-U-M

Judicial respect for compliance
Ultra vires check on laws
Doctrine of separation upheld
Unconstitutional actions barred
Militant youth recruitment challenged

Prelims Questions

  1. The term “ultra vires” refers to:
    a) A constitutional amendment
    b) An act beyond legal authority
    c) Judicial review of fundamental rights
    d) Doctrine of basic structure
  2. In which case did the SC direct the end of SPOs in anti-Maoist operations?
    a) Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India
    b) Nandini Sundar vs. State of Chhattisgarh
    c) Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India
    d) Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala
  3. What was Salwa Judum primarily associated with?
    a) Land acquisition reform
    b) Tribal displacement for development
    c) Anti-Maoist operations in Chhattisgarh
    d) Forest conservation in central India

Mains Questions

  1. Examine the significance of the Nandini Sundar judgment in the context of the separation of powers and legislative competence. (GS2 – Polity)
  2. Discuss the constitutional and ethical implications of using civilian youth as Special Police Officers in counterinsurgency operations. (GS2 – Governance/Ethics)

Answer Key Table

Q.NoAnswerExplanation
1b“Ultra vires” means acting beyond one’s legal authority
2bThis was the central case concerning SPOs in Chhattisgarh
3cSalwa Judum was a tribal militia for counter-Maoist operations

Seed IAS Foundation

Featured courses

Seed IAS Foundation

The Daily
Seed News Portal

100% free for school & college students

Each news starts with UPSC relevance

Key terms explained in a simple table

News in plain, easy-to-understand language

Practice Corner:

• 3 Prelims MCQs
• 2 Mains questions
• Daily online quiz at 8 PM

Get SEED NEWS DAILY
Now on WhatsApp
absolutely FREE!

Read more newsletters