With reference to the Constitution of India, prohibition or limitations or provisions contained in ordinary laws cannot act as prohibitions or limitations on the constitutional powers under Article 142. It could mean which one of the following?
Contents15
- AThe decisions taken by the Election Commission of India while discharging its duties cannot be challenged in any court of law.
- BThe Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
- CIn the event of grave financial crisis in the country, the President of India can declare Financial Emergency without the counsel from the Cabinet.
- DState Legislatures cannot make laws on certain matters without the concurrence of Union Legislature.
Show answer
Answer: (B) The Supreme Court of India is not constrained in the exercise of its powers by laws made by the Parliament.
The correct answer is (B).
Article 142 gives the Supreme Court the power to pass any order necessary to do 'complete justice' in a case.
The key idea is that ordinary laws made by Parliament cannot limit this constitutional power.
This was famously stated in the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case (Union Carbide case), where the Supreme Court said it could go beyond regular laws to ensure justice.
In simple terms, Article 142 places the Supreme Court's power to deliver justice above ordinary legislation.
Tip: Article 142 = Supreme Court's 'complete justice' power that even Parliament's laws cannot restrict.
Article 142 gives the Supreme Court overriding power to deliver 'complete justice' even when ordinary laws made by Parliament would normally restrict such actions.
The Bhopal Gas Tragedy case established that the Supreme Court can use Article 142 to bypass regular legal procedures when ensuring justice requires it.
UPSC is testing whether students understand the hierarchy where constitutional powers can override ordinary legislation when delivering justice.
Article 142 Complete Justice Power
Indian Polity Article 142 constitutional powers Supreme Court
Article 142: Supreme Court's Complete Justice Power & Constitutional Supremacy
Article 142 empowers Supreme Court to pass any order necessary for 'complete justice'
Ordinary laws made by Parliament cannot limit this constitutional power
Power extends beyond existing legal frameworks when justice demands it
Established in Bhopal Gas Tragedy (Union Carbide) case landmark judgment
Constitutional Supremacy
Article 142 represents the apex of judicial power in India's constitutional framework. It allows the Supreme Court to transcend ordinary statutory limitations when delivering justice. This power flows directly from the Constitution itself, making it superior to any law Parliament might pass.
Article 142 vs Ordinary Laws
Aspect | Article 142 Power | Ordinary Parliamentary Laws |
|---|---|---|
Source | Constitution of India | Parliament under legislative powers |
Limitation | Cannot be restricted by ordinary laws | Can be amended/repealed by Parliament |
Scope | Complete justice in any matter | Specific subject matter only |
Hierarchy | Constitutional power - supreme | Statutory power - subordinate |
Override capacity | Can go beyond existing laws | Must work within legal framework |
Key Applications
Bhopal Gas Tragedy case: Supreme Court used Article 142 to order compensation beyond statutory provisions
Environmental cases: Ordered closure of polluting industries despite existing licenses
Social justice cases: Mandated immediate relief measures transcending procedural delays
Constitutional crisis: Resolved deadlocks when ordinary legal remedies proved inadequate
Question Analysis
This question tests understanding that Article 142 creates constitutional supremacy over ordinary legislation. Option B correctly identifies that Parliament's laws cannot constrain the Supreme Court's Article 142 powers - a principle established in landmark cases like Union Carbide.
Trap: Confusing Article 142 with Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies) - both are different Supreme Court powers
Trap: Thinking Parliament can limit any Supreme Court power - Article 142 specifically cannot be constrained
Trap: Assuming 'complete justice' means unlimited power - it's still bound by constitutional principles
Option A trap: Election Commission immunity is Article 324, not Article 142 related
Supreme Court Constitutional Powers
Indian Polity Supreme Court constitutional powers
Supreme Court's Constitutional Powers: Complete Framework
Article 32: Right to Constitutional Remedies - fundamental rights enforcement
Article 142: Complete justice power - transcends ordinary laws
Article 143: Advisory jurisdiction - President can seek legal opinion
Articles 132-136: Various appellate jurisdictions for different case types
Constitutional Powers Structure
# Supreme Court Powers
## Original Jurisdiction
- Inter-state disputes
- Centre-State disputes
- Fundamental rights (Art 32)
- Presidential election disputes
## Appellate Jurisdiction
- Constitutional matters
- Civil cases
- Criminal cases
- Special leave petitions
## Advisory Jurisdiction
- Article 143
- Presidential reference
- Legal opinion only
- Not binding
## Extraordinary Powers
- Article 142 - Complete justice
- Contempt of court
- Review jurisdiction
- Curative petitionsKey Constitutional Articles
Article | Power Granted | Key Feature | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
Article 32 | Writ jurisdiction | 'Heart of Constitution' - fundamental rights | Only against state action |
Article 142 | Complete justice | Cannot be limited by ordinary laws | Must align with constitutional principles |
Article 143 | Advisory opinion | Presidential reference only | Opinion is not binding |
Article 136 | Special Leave Petition | Discretionary jurisdiction - any matter | Court's discretion to admit |
Article 32 vs 142: Article 32 is for fundamental rights only, Article 142 is for complete justice in any case
Advisory jurisdiction: President seeks opinion under Article 143, not Article 142
Binding nature: Article 143 opinions are not binding, Article 142 orders are fully binding
Original vs appellate: Don't confuse which cases come under original jurisdiction (inter-state) vs appellate (appeals from High Courts)
Constitutional vs Statutory Powers
Indian Polity constitutional powers ordinary laws prohibition
Constitutional vs Statutory Powers: Hierarchy & Limitations
Constitutional powers derive directly from Constitution - cannot be limited by ordinary laws
Statutory powers are created by Parliament/Legislature - can be modified or repealed
Constitutional supremacy means Constitution prevails over all other laws
Legal Hierarchy
India follows constitutional supremacy where the Constitution sits at the apex of legal hierarchy. Constitutional powers flow directly from foundational document and cannot be curtailed by subordinate legislation, ensuring separation of powers and judicial independence.
Power Source Comparison
Type | Source | Can be Limited by Parliament? | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
Constitutional Powers | Constitution itself | No - constitutionally protected | Article 142, Article 32, Presidential powers |
Statutory Powers | Acts of Parliament | Yes - can amend/repeal | CrPC powers, Income Tax Act provisions |
Delegated Powers | Rules/Regulations | Yes - subordinate legislation | Service rules, municipal bylaws |
Customary Powers | Conventions/Precedents | Partially - depends on codification | Governor's discretionary powers |
Legal Hierarchy in India
%%{init: {"flowchart": {"wrappingWidth": 460}}}%%
flowchart TD
s1["`**Constitution of India**
Supreme law - **cannot be overridden** by any other law`"]
s2["`**Constitutional Amendments**
Modify Constitution through **Article 368** - special procedure`"]
s3["`**Parliamentary Laws**
Acts passed by Parliament - **subject to constitutional validity**`"]
s4["`**Subordinate Legislation**
Rules, regulations, notifications - **must conform to parent Act**`"]
s5["`**Judicial Precedents**
Supreme Court judgments - **binding on all courts**`"]
s1 --> s2
s2 --> s3
s3 --> s4
s4 --> s5Trap: Assuming Parliament can limit any constitutional power - some powers like Article 142 are immune
Trap: Confusing amendment power (Article 368) with ordinary legislative power - different procedures
Basic Structure: Even constitutional amendments cannot destroy basic structure - Kesavananda Bharati case
Supremacy confusion: Constitutional supremacy in India vs Parliamentary supremacy in UK - different systems
Other Constitutional Authorities Powers
Indian Polity Election Commission President State Legislatures
Constitutional Authorities: Powers & Limitations Analysis
Election Commission has constitutional independence under Article 324 but decisions can be challenged in courts
President's emergency powers require Cabinet advice except in very limited circumstances
State Legislatures need Union concurrence only for specific subjects in Concurrent List
Authority Powers vs Question Options
Option | Authority | Actual Constitutional Position | Why Wrong for Article 142 |
|---|---|---|---|
A | Election Commission | Decisions can be challenged in courts despite Article 324 | About judicial review, not Article 142 |
B | Supreme Court | Article 142 power cannot be limited by ordinary laws | CORRECT - matches Article 142 principle |
C | President | Financial Emergency needs Cabinet advice - Article 352-360 | About emergency powers, not Article 142 |
D | State Legislatures | Concurrent List needs Union concurrence in some cases | About federal structure, not Article 142 |
Constitutional Independence vs Limitations
Election Commission: Article 324 grants independence but judicial review remains available
Presidential Powers: Bound by Council of Ministers' aid and advice except ceremonial functions
Emergency Provisions: Even emergency powers have constitutional checks - parliamentary approval needed
Federal Structure: State powers limited by constitutional distribution - Union, State, Concurrent Lists
Option A trap: Election Commission independence ≠ immunity from judicial review - different concepts
Option C trap: President's emergency powers are not absolute - require constitutional procedures
Option D trap: Federal limitations are about division of powers, not about ordinary law restrictions
Article confusion: Don't mix Article 324 (Election Commission) with Article 142 (Supreme Court complete justice)