Article 139 of the Indian Constitution is a provision that supplements the original writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court granted under Article 32. While Article 32 specifically empowers the Supreme Court to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights, Article 139 provides Parliament with the authority to expand the Court’s power to issue writs for other purposes as well.
This article highlights the flexibility within the constitutional framework, allowing the legislative body to confer additional powers upon the judiciary to ensure justice and remedy in matters extending beyond the realm of fundamental rights, thereby strengthening the Supreme Court’s role as the guardian of the Constitution and the law.
Original Text
139. Conferring on the Supreme Court powers to issue certain writs.— Parliament may by law confer on the Supreme Court power to issue directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for any purposes other than those mentioned in clause (2) of article 32.
Detailed Explanation
Article 139 deals with the legislative power of Parliament to enlarge the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. It provides that Parliament, through a law passed by it, can grant the Supreme Court the authority to issue directions, orders, or writs. These writs include the conventional five: habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari, or any of them.
The crucial distinction made by Article 139 is regarding the purpose for which these writs can be issued. Article 32(2) constitutionally empowers the Supreme Court to issue these writs specifically for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. This power under Article 32 is an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be taken away.
In contrast, Article 139 allows Parliament to confer the power to issue these writs for any purposes other than the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This means that if Parliament deems it necessary, it can enact a law empowering the Supreme Court to issue writs for the enforcement of statutory rights, duties of public authorities that do not necessarily involve fundamental rights, or for other legal purposes as defined by that law.
This article is thus an enabling provision for Parliament to expand the remedial jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond the protection of fundamental rights. It allows for legislative initiative in tailoring the Supreme Court’s powers to address a wider range of legal issues requiring high-level judicial intervention, such as disputes related to specific statutes or administrative actions that do not directly infringe upon fundamental rights. The power under Article 139 is not inherent but is a conferred power, dependent upon parliamentary legislation.
Detailed Notes
- Article 139 is an enabling provision for Parliament to expand the Supreme Court’s writ jurisdiction.
- It allows Parliament to confer power on the Supreme Court by law.
- The conferred power is to issue directions, orders, or writs.
- The types of writs explicitly mentioned are habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari, or any of them.
- This power is for any purposes other than the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
- Enforcement of Fundamental Rights is the specific purpose covered by the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction under Article 32(2).
- Article 139 supplements Article 32, allowing for the extension of writ jurisdiction to non-Fundamental Rights matters.
- The power under Article 139 is not original to the Supreme Court; it must be conferred by an Act of Parliament.
- This article allows Parliament to equip the Supreme Court with remedies for statutory rights, public duties, or other legal matters requiring writ intervention.
- It signifies the role of Parliament in shaping the procedural and remedial aspects of the Supreme Court’s functions beyond its core constitutional mandate under Article 32.
Additional Comments
- The existence of Article 139 signifies the Constitution makers’ foresight in providing a mechanism to adapt the Supreme Court’s powers to future legal needs that might arise, extending its remedial capacity.
- While Article 32 provides a guaranteed right to move the Supreme Court for FR enforcement, Article 139 deals with a discretionary power of Parliament to confer jurisdiction for other matters.
- This article underscores the difference between the Supreme Court’s original, constitutionally guaranteed jurisdiction (like under Article 32) and jurisdiction that can be granted or defined by Parliament (like under Article 139 or appellate jurisdiction under Articles 132-136).
- Article 139 allows Parliament to potentially grant the Supreme Court a power similar to that exercised by High Courts under Article 226, although the scope and exercise might differ based on the specific parliamentary law.
Summary
Article 139 empowers the Indian Parliament to enact a law that confers upon the Supreme Court the power to issue directions, orders, or writs, including the traditional five writs like habeas corpus and mandamus. This conferred power is specifically for purposes other than the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, which is already covered by the Supreme Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Article 32. Thus, Article 139 allows Parliament to expand the remedial scope of the Supreme Court to address matters of legal rights and duties not falling under the fundamental rights domain, supplementing the Court’s role as the ultimate interpreter and guardian of the law.