Constitutional Scheme of Separation of Powers Issues and Challenges with special reference to Judicial Review

The Doctrine of separation of powers means that one person or body of persons should not exercise all three types of powers of government i.e. Executive would be the same persons there would be a danger, because the one who implements the law will become the Legislature himself and he will make arbitrary law, not only this, he also interprets the law himself, likewise if one person or body of persons could exercise both executive and judicial powers in same matter there would be complete tyranny. Hence, the separation of government powers is essential. The typical division is in to three branches : a legislative, an executive and a judiciary, which is the trias political model. It can be contrasted with the ‘fusion of powers’ in ‘parliamentary and semi-presidential systems’, where the executive and legislative branches overlap. But at the same time this division of powers creates some controversy, when the legislative organ try to overriding on judiciary, or the judiciary declares the laws as unconstitutional which made by the legislature, not only this, the parliament has always taken the support of amendment of constitution to prevent the effect of judicial decisions. Article 50 of our constitution provides that the state shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the state. But the practice no separation is visible. In India, each organ of the government, being independent in it own sphere, is subject to another organ to some extent following the principle of checks and balances. The concept of check and balances implies that the functioning of one organ is to be checked in some measure by the other.