5.2.1. re Delhi Laws Act Case, 1951

In the re Delhi Laws Act case, 1951 it was for the first time observed by the Supreme Court that except where the Constitution has vested power in a body, the principle that one organ should not perform functions which essentially belong to others is followed in India.

Court’s Ruling: By a majority of 5:2, the Court held that the theory of separation of powers though not part and parcel of our Constitution, in exceptional circumstances is evident in the provisions of the Constitution itself. As observed by Kania, C.J.:

“Although in the Constitution of India there is no express separation of powers, it is clear that a legislature is created by the constitution and detailed provisions are made for making that legislature pass laws. Does it not imply that unless it can be gathered from other provisions of the constitution, other bodies-executive or judicial-are not intended to discharge legislative functions?”

This judgment implied that all the three organs of the State, i.e., the Legislature, the Judiciary, and the Executive are bound by and subject to the provisions of the Constitution. It is the Constitution which demarcates their respective powers, jurisdictions, responsibilities and relationship with one another. Also, it can be assumed that none of the organs of the State, including the judiciary, would exceed its powers as laid down in the Constitution.