Advocate Aankhi Ghosh writes that it is time to reargue Kesavananda Bharati case and reconsider the Basic Structure doctrine. The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (Kesavananda Bharati) is perhaps the most well-known constitutional decision of the. Kesavananda Bharathi is the case which saved Indian democracy; thanks to Shri Kesavananda Bharati, eminent jurist Nanabhoy Palkhivala and the seven.
|Published (Last):||12 March 2007|
|PDF File Size:||14.56 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.72 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Precedent in English Law. It is in the latter sense that in my view of the matter, implications have a place in the interpretation of the Constitution: Lord Greene observed in Bidie v. There is no special significance given to some provisions of the Constitution as opposed to others.
Kesavananda Bharati vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 24 April,
There is a sharp conflict of opinion in Australia respecting the question whether an amendment can be made which would be inconsistent with the Preamble of the Constitution Act referring to the “indissoluble” character and the sections which refer juvgment the “Federal” nature of the Constitution.
Return to Text Id. Wikimedia Commons has media related to Kesavananda Bharati. Although “law” must ordinarily include Constitutional law there is a clear demarcation between ordinary law which is made in the exercise of legislative power and Constitutional law, which is made in the exercise of constituent kewavananda.
Daphtary termed the incident as “the blackest day in the history of democracy”. There is no hint anywhere that abrogation of minorities rights was ever in the contemplation of the important members of the Constituent Assembly. The Seventeenth Amendment has not derogated from the sovereignty, the republican form of government and the federal structure, and the question whether they can be touched by amendment does not arise for decision.
Appellate Assistant Commissioner A. This proviso shall cease to have effect on a date to be fixed by the Governor-General by Proclamation published in the Gazette. English words derive colour from those which surround them. Supreme Court of India. Sentences are not mere collections of words to be taken out of the sentence defined separately by reference judbment the “dictionary or decided cases, and then put back again into the sentence with the meaning which you have assigned to them kezavananda separate words, so as to give the sentence or judvment a meaning which as a sentence or phrase it cannot bear without distortion of the English language.
E-mail this Kssavananda Print Article. Seervai relied on bbarati portion within brackets of the following passage at pp. Here, the comprehensive expression “repeal or amend” gives power to have a completely new Act different from an existing act of Parliament. The basic norm or Grundnorm as Kelson calls it, is the Constitution which acquires validity from the fact of social acceptance or recognition.
Reliance on a principle coined by judges themselves to uphold the insularity and independence of the judiciary has irony writ large on its face. In his reply dated May 22,the Secretary of State observed: In State of Victoria v. The majority decision has held that the basic structure of the Constitution cannot be destroyed by means of amendment. Few words in the English language have a natural or ordinary meaning in the sense that they must be so read that their meaning is entirely independent of their context.
The other passages relied on by the petitioners from the judgments of the other learned Judges on the Bench in that case are as follows:.
Article 46 supplements the directive given above and enjoins the State to promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and to protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.
The method of construing statutes that I prefer is not to take particular words and attribute to them a sort of prima facie meaning which you may have to displace or modify. Maharajadhiraja Madhav Rao v.
He further held that when Article confers on Parliament the right to amend the Constitution, it can be exercised over all the provisions of the Constitution. In order to fully appreciate the decision of the Privy Council it is necessary to set out the relevant provisions of the Ceylon Independence Order in Council,hereinafter referred to as the Ceylon Constitution. Return to Text 4 SCC at p. In February Swami Kesavananda Bharatisenior plaintiff and head of “Edneer Mutt” – a Hindu Mutt situated in Edneera village in Kasaragod district of Keralachallenged the Kerala government’s attempts, under two state land reform acts, to impose restrictions on the management of its property.
I may now briefly notice the directive principles mentioned in Part IV. Maybe it is time for the strong and eloquent judges of the Supreme Court of India to replace this and restore the Constitution to the glory of its origin.
Hari Shankar Bagla v. Primary among these was the imposition of the state of emergency by Indira Gandhi inand the subsequent attempt to suppress her prosecution through the 39th Amendment.
Again, in Article 2the word “amendment” has been used in a limited sense. It will be noticed that Article is contained in a separate part and the heading is “Amendment of the Constitution”, but the marginal note reads “Procedure for amendment of the Constitution”.
Text Books at Sapna Online. It may therefore be said that the Kesavananda decision has forged more fetters on the powers of Parliament to amend the Constitution. They have all explicitly held that there are no inherent or implied limitations on the power of the Parliament to amend any part of the Constitution.
The doctrine has been tweaked at regular intervals to accommodate judicial ideology and morality. I may here trace the history kesavanands the shaping of the Preamble because this would show that the Preamble was in conformity with the Constitution as it was finally accepted. But he emphasised the distinction when he observed: Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Makarajadhiraja of Darbhanga SCR at Would this not suggest that the framers of the Constitution attached special significance to it?
Kesavananda Bharati judgment: The Major Minority
It seeks very feebly to tell the world of what we have thought or dreamt for so long, and what we now hope to achieve in the near future.
The provisions of Sub-clauses cd and e can rightly be said to involve the federal structure and the rights of the States. If it was the design that fundamental rights might be abrogated surely they would have expressly provided it somewhere. Democracy is by, for and of the people. After the plan of June 3,which led to the decision to partition the country and to set up two independent Dominions of India and Pakistan, on June 8,a joint sub- committee of the Union Constitution and Provincial Constitution Committees, took note that the objective resolution would require amendment in view of the latest announcement of the British Government The’ announcement of June 3 had made it clear that full independence, in the form of Dominion Status, would be conferred on India as from August 15, Retrieved from ” https: The provisional Parliament is competent to exercise the power of amending the Constitution under Article