Census Commissioner v. R. Krishnamurthy
Background
The Madras High Court directed the census authorities to conduct caste-wise enumeration across the country, initially in litigation about an appointment and later by repeating that direction in a separate petition. The governing census notifications collected Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe information but did not provide enumeration of other castes. The Census Commissioner challenged the High Court's power to prescribe that additional policy.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside both High Court judgments and orders. The first direction travelled beyond the dispute and was made without the Commissioner as a party; it could not bind him. The later order repeated it without adequate examination. Under the Census Act, choosing the census questions was entrusted to the Central Government, and the High Court could not add its preferred policy by mandamus where the existing notifications had not been challenged as unlawful. Judicial review could still address unconstitutional or arbitrary policy, but did not authorise courts to decide that another policy would be wiser.
Lesson Learnt
A person challenging government policy must establish a legally reviewable defect rather than simply advocate a preferable policy. This ruling limited judicial prescription of census questions; it did not prohibit the Government from choosing lawful caste enumeration in future.