The author, without a doubt, has raised some pertinent questions regarding, what can be mildly termed as judicial activism.
It is the apathy and deliberate inaction of the legislature, which seems forever entangled in dislodging or accusing the government of the day, and the executive, whose dismal failure at implementation has now become almost a folklore, which has forced the judiciary to step up and bear this burden.
The vacuum created by the abdication of responsibility and the attitude of prevarication adopted with impunity by these two branches of the government have created a situation where but for an overactive judiciary the state itself would be jeopardised. The best example, the author has himself pointed out, is the Lok Pal bill which has been hanging since ages, thanks to the sophistry of the legislature.
Can the judiciary really be accused of excess if it puts pressure on the legislature to justify and terminate such inordinate delays? For a common man's mind, like mine, not accustomed to intricacies of constitutional and legal repercussions, it seems perfectly logical and just.