I.A.ANSARI, J. - (1.) It is not uncommon for a Court of law to face challenge to its own jurisdiction and authority. It is not unusual that a Court of law is invited to decide if it has the jurisdiction in a given case and, if so, what are the parameters of its jurisdiction and powers. When such a question is raised, the Court cannot ignore or brush aside the question so posed and must decide the same in accordance with law. If the Court finds that it has no jurisdiction, it shall have no hesitation in saying so; but if it finds that it has the jurisdiction, it must boldly declare so and lay down the ambits of its own powers.
(2.) The legitimacy of the power of the Courts to review legislative action has been one of the most debated questions in the Indian Legal History. While presenting his views on the significance of Article 25, which corresponds to the present Article 32 of the Constitution of India, Dr. B R Ambedkar, Chairman of the Drafting Committee of the Constituent Assembly, expressed himself as follows: "If I was asked to name any particular article in his Constitution as the most important-an article without which this Constitution would be a nullity-I could not refer to any other article except this one. It is the very soul of the Constitution and the very heart of it and I am glad that the House has realized its importance."
(3.) Notwithstanding the fact that Article 32 was described as the heart and soul of the Constitution, the parameters of the powers of even the Supreme Court under Article 32 to review legislative action has remained one of the subjects of intense debate in Indian Legal History. No wonder, therefore, that contours of the powers of the High Court under Article 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution come to be questioned before the High Court itself. When the question has been raised, the High Court has to answer the question and so do I.;