Dalvoy Logo
Dalvoy
UPSC MainsGeneral Studies Paper IIIndian PolityPractice question

Rejection of Parliamentary Sovereignty in India

Although India preferred the British parliamentary system, it did not opt for the 'doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty'. Explicate India's reasons for doing so.

Explicate~250 words2 min readmedium
Attempt it first, timed · optional

Write the answer on paper, as in the exam. Start the timer, keep to the word target.

00:00/ 11 min · 250 words

Done writing? Photograph the sheet and see how it scores against this model answer, with feedback on what to fix.

Upload your answer sheet

How to approach

Start by contrasting the British doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty with India's principle of Constitutional Supremacy. In the body, systematically explicate the reasons India rejected absolute legislative supremacy, citing specific constitutional provisions, federal dynamics, fundamental rights, and judicial review. Conclude by highlighting India's synthesis of parliamentary accountability and constitutional checks.

Model answer

295 words

Introduction

India adopted the British Westminster model of parliamentary democracy to ensure executive accountability to the legislature. However, it consciously diverged from the British doctrine of absolute 'Parliamentary Sovereignty' in favor of 'Constitutional Supremacy' to prevent majoritarian overreach and protect the nation's diverse socio-political fabric.

Reasons for Rejecting Parliamentary Sovereignty

  • Written Constitution and Constitutional Supremacy: Unlike the United Kingdom with its unwritten constitution, the Indian Constitution is written and supreme. The Parliament is a creature of the Constitution and must function strictly within the boundaries and mandates laid down by it.
  • Federal Division of Powers: India's continental diversity necessitated a federal structure rather than a unitary system. Under the Seventh Schedule, legislative powers are demarcated into the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists, explicitly barring Parliament from an unfettered law-making monopoly over state subjects.
  • Justiciable Fundamental Rights: To safeguard individual liberty against legislative excess, Part III was incorporated. Under Article 13, any law enacted by Parliament that infringes upon or abridges Fundamental Rights is declared void ab initio.
  • Robust Judicial Review: Unlike the UK where courts cannot strike down primary parliamentary legislation, the Indian judiciary is armed with the power of judicial review under Articles 32 and 226, enabling the Supreme Court and High Courts to invalidate unconstitutional enactments.
  • Limited Amending Power (Basic Structure Doctrine): The power of Parliament to amend the Constitution under Article 368 is not plenary. In the landmark Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and Minerva Mills (1980) rulings, the Supreme Court established that Parliament cannot alter the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution.

Conclusion

Instead of unbridled legislative sovereignty, India forged a unique constitutional synthesis combining British parliamentary responsibility with American-style judicial supremacy. This delicate balance ensures that while the popular will is represented, the supremacy of the Constitution and democratic pluralism remain inviolable.

Key facts to remember

definition
Parliamentary Sovereignty

A principle of the UK constitution making Parliament the supreme legal authority, which can create or end any law without being overridden by courts or bounded by a codified constitution.

case study
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

The Supreme Court held that Parliament's constituent power under Article 368 does not enable it to alter or destroy the Basic Structure or framework of the Constitution.

case study
Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980)

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that a limited amending power is itself a basic feature of the Indian Constitution, preventing Parliament from converting limited power into an absolute one.

Frequently asked questions

Why is the Indian Parliament not considered sovereign?

The Indian Parliament operates under a written constitution, a federal division of powers, justiciable fundamental rights, and judicial review, meaning its laws can be struck down if unconstitutional.

← All questions on this topic (197)