Article 50

Background and evolution

Under British rule, district collectors and other executive officers also exercised judicial powers as magistrates. This combination of revenue collection, policing oversight and judicial functions in one person was seen by nationalists as a source of arbitrary rule. The Indian National Congress had demanded the separation of judicial and executive functions from its early sessions in the late nineteenth century.

The Constituent Assembly included Article 50 as a directive rather than a Fundamental Right because implementing it would need administrative reorganisation and resources in the states. Ambedkar explained that the framers wanted separation to be achieved within a reasonable time, without rigid deadlines.

Key features and provisions

• Text: the State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State.
• Focus: primarily the subordinate courts and magistracy in states, where executive and judicial roles overlapped.
• Non-justiciable: cannot be enforced directly in court.
• Implementation by law: the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, separated judicial magistrates, under the control of the High Court, from executive magistrates, such as district magistrates, who handle preventive and order-maintenance functions.
• Supporting provisions: Articles 233 to 237 give High Courts control over subordinate courts, and Article 124 onwards ensure security of tenure and salaries for higher judges.