Supreme Court

Though the apex court's ban on timber felling was welcomed by conservationists, its ecological and social impact is only now coming to light. To alleviate many of its unforeseen consequences, it is imperative for several measures to be implemented in tandem - a comprehensive forest survey, involvement of the local community and a much-needed simplification of the legal process.

.

When the executive refuses to issue the notification announcing the date a particular law passed by the legislature comes into force, the judiciary is well within its powers to intervene. Yet, there have been occasions when the apex court has allowed such wrongs to go unchecked.

This paper reviews India's recent growth performance and assesses medium-term growth prospects in the light of relevant factors. These factors include the likely evolution of fiscal and savings-investment imbalances, financial sector performance, the role of the external sector, economic reforms and productivity, infrastructure constraints, problems in agriculture, the likely developments in labour supply and demand and governmental performance. The paper concludes that it might be reasonable to expect growth in the next five years to fluctuate in the range of 4 to 6 per cent, perhaps averaging close to 5 per cent, provided there is no major economic or financial crisis. This is much lower than the 6.7 per cent growth achieved in the Eighth Plan period and far lower than the 8 per cent mooted in the Tenth Plan.

In judging the Narmada Bachao Andolan case, the Supreme Court, using the 'separation of powers' doctrine, side-stepped the issues of entitlement and suffering, and chose to concern itself only with the issues of relief and rehabilitation. It was only on the latter issue that the court was willing to hear the representation of the NBA. The weak interrogation of the doctrine of separation of powers allowed the court to abdicate much of its responsibility to those affected by the Narmada dam project.