Al-Ameen College of Law

Bangalore

(I SEMESTER, LL.B, 3 YEARS)

Prepared by: Kavya Hebbar

Lecturer in Law

Al-Ameen College of Law

 Al-Ameen College of Law

Bangalore

I Semester, 3 years, LL.B Degree Model Answer Paper, 2014

Subject: Constitution

Prepared By: Kavya Hebbar

Lecturer in Law
Al-Ameen College of Law

Duration: 3 hours Max Marks: 100

Instruction:

1. Answer Q. No. 9 compulsorily, any five of the remaining.

2. Q. No. 9 carries 10 marks.
3. All other question carries 16 marks each.
4. Answer should be written either in English or Kannada completely.
Marks: 4x16= 64

Q.1. Define ‘State’. Explain the tests to determine which other authorities can be
included in the definition.

Ans:
Synopsis:
a. Introduction
b. Definition
c. What includes state
d. Tests for determining other authorities
e. Conclusion

Introduction:

The Indian Constitution provides fundamental rights under Part-III of the Constitution
for every citizen of the country. Fundamental rights are deemed essential to protect the rights
and liberties of the people against the encroachment of the power delegated by them to their
Government. They are limitations upon all the power of the Government, legislative as well
as executive and they are essential for the preservation of public and private rights,
notwithstanding the representative character of political instruments. The advocates of
inclusion of these rights in the Indian Constitution emphasise that their incorporation in the
constitution vests them with a sanctity which the legislators dare not to violate so easily.
 Individual needs constitutional protection against the State. The rights which are
given under Part-III of the constitution are a guarantee against State action as distinguished
from violation of such rights from private persons. So as to claim remedies against State one
must know what is meant by State or what includes State?

Definition of State:

Article 12 of the Indian Constitution defines the term ‘STATE’ as used in different
Article of Part-III of the Constitution. It says that unless the context otherwise requires the
term ‘State’ includes the following:

1. The Government and Parliament of India, i.e., Executive and Legislature of

the Union.
2. The Government and Parliament of each State. i.e., Executive and Legislature
of States.
3. All local or other authorities within the territory of India.
4. All local and other authorities under the control of the Government of India.

What State includes?

The term ‘state’ thus includes executive as well as the legislative organs of the Union and
States. It is, therefore, the actions of these bodies that can be challenged before the courts as
violating fundamental rights.

a. Authorities—According to Webster’s Dictionary, “Authority” means a person or body

exercising power to command. In the context of Art. 12, the word “authority” means
the power to make laws, orders, regulations, bye-laws, notification etc., which have
the force of law and power to enforce those laws.
b. Local Authorities—‘Local Authorities’ as defined in Section 3(31) of the General
Clauses Act refers to authorities like Municipalities, District Boards, Panchayats,
Improvement Trust and Mining Settlement Boards.
c. Other Authorities-- In Article 12 the expression ‘other authorities’ is used after
mentioning a few of them, such as, the government, Parliament of India, the
Government and Legislature of each of the States and all local authorities.
Case: University of Madras Vs. Santa Bai

The Madras High Court held that ‘other authorities’ could only indicate authorities of
a like nature, i.e., ejusdem generis. So construed, it could only mean authorities exercising
governmental or sovereign functions. It cannot include persons, natural or juristic, such as a
University unless it is ‘maintained by state’.
Case: Electricity Board, Rajasthan Vs. Mohan Lal.

The Supreme Court held that the expression ‘other authorities’ is wide enough to
include al authorities created by the Constitution or statute on whom powers are conferred by
law. It is not necessary that the statutory authority should be engaged in performing
governmental or sovereign function. On this interpretation the expression ‘other authorities’
will include Rajasthan Electricity Board.

Tests laid down to determine which authorities can be included in the definition of
State:

The Supreme Court in Airport Authority’s case it has been laid down following test
for determining whether a body is an agency or instrumentality of the Government:-

1. Financial resources of the State is the chief funding source, i.e., if the entire share
capital of the corporation is held by the government,
2. Existence of deep and pervasive State Control,
3. Functional character being governmental in essence, i.e., if the functions of the
corporation are public importance and closely related to governmental functions,
4. If a department of Government is transferred to a corporation,
5. Whether the corporation, enjoys monopoly status which is State conferred or State
protected.
However, the Court said that these tests are not conclusive but illustrative only and
will have to be used with care and caution.

Case: Som Prakash Vs. Union of India

The Court held that a government company (Bharat Petroleum Corporation)
fell within the meaning of the expression ‘The State’ used in Article 12. The
expression ‘other authorities’ will include all constitutional or statutory authorities on
whom powers are conferred for the purpose of carrying commercial activities or
bodies created for the purpose of promoting economic activities. The expression
‘other authorities’ is not confined only to statutory corporations alone but may include
a government company, a registered society, or bodies which have some nexus with
government.

Case: U.P. Warehousing Corporations Vs. Vijai Narain

In this case it was held that the U.P. Warehousing Corporation which
constituted under a statute and owned and controlled by the Government was an
agency or instrumentality of the Government and therefore, “the State” within the
meaning of Article 12.
Conclusion:

The Indian Constitution provides rights and freedoms to every citizen of the country
under Part-III of the Constitution. Individual has constitutional protection against the
arbitrary actions of the State. If any right or freedom has been infringed then he can claim
remedies for the same. The word State does not only mean the legislature and executive of
the Union and State but also includes local and other authorities. Supreme Court has given
many decisions where it rightly said that Article 12 includes all those bodies which are,
though not created by the Constitution or by a statute, are acting as agencies or
instrumentalities of the Government.

Q.NO. 2. Discuss the salient features of Indian Constitution with the special reference to
Parliamentary Form of Government.

Ans: Synopsis

a. Introduction
b. Salient Features
c. Parliamentary Form of Government
d. Conclusion

Introduction:

The Constitution means a document having a special legal sanctity which sets out the
frame work and the principal functions of the organs of government of a state and declares
the principles governing those organs. The Rules which regulates the structure of the
principal organs of the government and their relationship is known as Constitutional Law.
Indian Constitution came in to force on 26th January, 1950. The Indian Constitution is
lengthiest Constitution in the world with federal character.

Salient Features:

1. The lengthiest Constitution in the world

2. Parliamentary Form of Govt.
3. Unique blend of rigidity and flexibility
4. Fundamental Rights
5. Directive principles of State Policy
6. A federation with strong centralizing tendency
7. Adult suffrage
8. An Independent judiciary
9. A Secular state
10. Single citizenship
11. Fundamental duties
1. The lengthiest Constitution in the world:
It Consists of 448 Articles (basically 395) divided in to 25 parts and 12
schedules. Where the American Constitution consists of 7 Articles, Australian
Constitution consists of 128 Articles and Canadian Constitution consists of 147
Articles.
Reasons for bulk constitution:
It gained experience from working of all constitutions of the world, avoiding
loopholes that might come in future.
The Model Adopted is as follows—
1. Fundamental Rights– from American Constitution
2. Parliamentary system of government– United Kingdom
3. Directive Principles of State Policy– Ireland
4. Emergency provision– German Reich and Govt. of India Act 1935

It lays down the structure not only of Central but also of State Govt. The vastness of
the country & problems relating to the language has added to the bulk of the Constitution.
It consists of long list of fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy,
provisions about organization of the judiciary, the services, and the public service
commission. Our Indian Constitution declares India to be a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular,
Democratic, Republic.

2. Parliamentary Form of Government:

The Constitution of India establishes a parliamentary form of government both
at the Centre and at the State. In this respect the makers of the Constitution have
followed the British model in Toto. Unique blend of rigidity and flexibility:

The Indian Constitution is unique blend of rigidity and flexibility. The nature of
amending process made it rigid. The rigid Constitution requires a special method of
amendment of any of its provision. The flexible Constitution can be amended by
ordinary legislative process. Indian Constitution though written is sufficiently
flexible. Only few provisions of the constitution require the consent of the half of the
State Legislature rest can be amended by special majority. Till now the Indian
Constitution has been amended for 98 times. In the view of Sir Ivor Jenning– Indian
constitution is rigid for following reasons:
a. That the process of amendment is complicated & difficult
b. That the matters which should have left to ordinary legislation having been
incorporated into the Constitution no change unless these matters is possible
without undergoing the process of amendment.
3. Fundamental Rights:
The incorporation of a formal Declaration of Fundamental Rights in Part III is
deemed to be a distinguishing feature of democratic state. These rights are prohibition
against the state. The State cannot make laws which take away or abridges any right
of the citizens guaranteed under Part III of the Indian Constitution.
If it passes such a law it may be considered as unconstitutional. But the mere
declaration of fundamental rights will be no use if there is no machinery for their
enforcement. Our Constitution has therefore, conferred on the Supreme Court the
power to grant most effective remedies in nature of writs Habeas Corpus, Mandamus,
Prohibition, Quo Warranto & Certiorari whenever the rights are violated.
Fundamental Rights are not absolute they subject to reasonable restrictions. Thus the
Constitution strikes to balance between individual liberty and social justice.

4. Directive Principles of State Policy:

The directive principles of state policy contained in Part IV of the Constitution
which set out the aims and objectives to be taken up by the State in the governance of
the country. This feature is borrowed from Ireland which had copied it from the
Spanish Constitution. The idea of welfare envisaged in the constitution can only be
achieved if the States endeavor to implement them with a high sense of moral duty. It
is not only the duty of the State to maintain law and order and protection of life,
liberty and property of the subject, but has to promote the prosperity and well-being
of the society. Unlike fundamental rights the Directive Principles are not justifiable.
Both fundamental rights and directive principles are supplementary and
complementary to each other. It can well be said that Directive Principles of State
Policy prescribed the goal to be attained and the fundamental rights lays down the
means by which goal is to be achieved.

5. A federation with strong centralizing tendency:

The Indian Constitution is generally a Federal Constitution. But one of its
important characteristic is the way in which the normal federal Constitution can be
adapted to emergency situation. It is the merit of the Constitution that it visualises the
circumstances when the strict application of the federal principles might destroy the
basic assumptions on which our Constitution is built. During the proclamation of
Emergency the normal distribution of powers between the Centre and the States
undergoes a vital change. The Union Parliament is empowered to legislate on any
subjects mentioned in the State List.

6. Adult Suffrage:
The Indian Constitution has been adopted Uniform adult suffrage system.
Every man and woman above 18 years of age has a right to vote and elect
representatives for the legislature. The adoption of Universal Adult Suffrage (Art.
326) without any qualification either of sex, property, taxation or the like is a bold
experiment in India, having regard to the vast extent of the country and its population,
 with an overwhelming illiteracy. This suffrage is wider than all the democratic
countries which have given right to vote to their people. In spite of many difficulties,
this bold experiment has been crowned with success.

7. An Independent Judiciary :
Mere enumeration of a number of fundamental rights in a constitution without
any provision for their safeguards will not serve any useful purpose. Unless there is a
remedy there is no right. For this purpose an establishment of impartial & independent
judiciary with a power of judicial review has been established under the Indian
Constitution. It is the custodian of the rights of the citizens.

8. A Secular State:
A Secular State has no religion of its own as recognized religion of State. It
treats all religion equally. The preamble declares the resolve of the people of India to
secure to all its citizens “liberty of belief, faith and worship”. It guarantees every
citizen a right to Profess, practice & propagate religion. In a Secular State, the State
only regulates the relationship between man and man. It is not concerned with the
relationship of man with God.

9. Single Citizenship
Though the Constitution of India is Federal & provides for dual polity i.e.,
Centre and State, but it provides for a single citizenship for the whole of India. The
American constitution provides for dual citizenship, i.e., citizen of America & state
citizenship.
Every Indian is the citizen of India and enjoys the same rights of citizenship no matter
in what State he resides.

10. Fundamental Duties:

Article 51-A of the Constitution inserted by 42nd Amendment Act 1976
provides for Fundamental Duties. It introduces a Code of ten “Fundamental duties”
for citizens. The Fundamental duties are indeed to serve as a constant reminder to
every citizen that while the Constitution has specifically conferred on them certain
Fundamental Rights, it also requires the citizens to observe certain basic norms of
democratic conduct and democratic behaviors.

Parliamentary form of Government

The essence of the parliamentary form of government is its responsibility to

the Legislature. There will be a President as a Constitutional Head, Prime Minister as
a Executive head and the Council of Ministers who are collectively responsible for the
lower house.
 President
Constitutional head
Prime Minister
Executive head

Council of ministers
Responsible to Lower house(Lok Sbha)

The members of lower house are elected directly by the people on the basis of adult
franchise normally for five years. The position is same in the States. This Government is,
therefore called a responsible government. The American Constitution establishes
Presidential types of Government based on the principle of separation of powers. The
President is the real executive head, who is directly elected by the people for 4 years. All
executive power vests on him. He is not responsible to the Lower House, i.e., Congress. The
members of Cabinet are not members of the Legislature. They are appointed by the President
and therefore, responsible to him.

The Union Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India.
The Union Parliament has a overriding effect over State legislature. During emergency the
Union Government has power over State Legislature also. During emergencies it acts as
Unitary Government. The Lok sabaha and the State legislative assembly can be dissolved by
the president when they lose the confidence in the house or the people. The president can be
removed from office for violation of constitution by the process of impeachment.

The advantages of the Parliamentary form of government are as follows:

a. It is responsible government.
b. The government is subjected to scrutiny in the legislature as regards its achievements
and failures. The ministers are accountable to the legislature.
c. The Prime minister who enjoys 2/3rd majority in Parliament is much powerful than the
President in the United States.
d. There is nothing to prevent the Prime Minister to choose the best talent from outside
for his cabinet and get them elected or nominated to either house of Parliament.
e. The disease of defection can be removed by appropriate legislation.

The Parliamentary form of government preferred mainly for two reasons:

a. The system was already in existence in India and people were well acquainted with it,
b. It provides for accountability of ministers to the Legislature.
The disadvantages of Parliamentary form of Government are as follows:

a. Multiplicity of Political Parties

b. Evil of Defection
c. Lack of cohesiveness and leadership in National Parties
d. Illiteracy of voters
e. Growth of regional parties
f. Criminalisation of Politics

Conclusion:

The Indian Constitution has unique features as it is the synthesis of referring the
constitutions of the different countries of the word. The concept of Parliamentary form of
Government has been taken from the Constitution of United Kingdom. In Parliamentary
system, legislature is supreme governing body. There is a distribution of powers between the
Centre and the State. But during emergency the Centre has a power to legislate on the matters
of State list. During emergency it acts like unitary government.

Q. No. 3. Article 14 permits classification but prohibits class legislation. Discuss.

Ans: Synopsis:

a. Introduction
b. Article 14—Right to Equality
c. Article 14 permits classification but prohibits class legislation
d. Test for reasonable classification
e. Case laws
f. Conclusion
Introduction:

The Fundamental Rights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian
citizen has the right to enjoy for a proper and harmonious development of personality. These
rights universally apply to all citizens, irrespective of race, place of birth,
religion, caste or gender. Aliens are also considered in matters like equality before law and
right to life. Equality is one of the basic elements of democracy. The object of right to
equality is to secure to the citizens equality in all its form. Articles 14 to 18 of the
Constitution guarantee the Right to Equality to every Citizen of India and also to Aliens.
Article 14 embodies the general principles of equality before law and prohibits unreasonable
discrimination between persons.
Right to Equality—Article 14

Article 14 of the Indian Constitution declares that ‘the state shall not deny to any
person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India’. It
uses two expressions—

a. Equality before law, and

b. Equal protection of the law.

Both these expressions aim at establishing what is called “equality of status” in the
preamble of the Constitution. While both expressions may seem to be identical, they do not
convey the same meaning. While ‘equality before the law’ is somewhat negative concept
implying the absence of any special privilege in favour of individuals and the equal subjects
of all classes to the ordinary law. ‘Equal protection of law’ is a more positive concept
implying equality of treatment in equal circumstances.

The rule of law embodied in the Article 14 is the basic feature of the Indian
Constitution and it cannot be destroyed even by an amendment to the constitution. The words
any person in Article 14 denotes that the equal protection of law is available to any person
who includes any company or association or body of individuals. The Article 14 extends to
both citizens and non-citizens and to natural persons as well as legal persons.

Exceptions to Rule of law are as follows:

1. Equality before law does not mean the “powers of the private citizens are the same as the
powers of the public officials.

Eg. Power to arrest– Police officers

2. The rule of law does not prevent certain classes of persons being subject to special rules

Eg: persons in armed forces subject to military laws.

3. Ministers and other executives given very wide discretionary power by statute

Eg: Rules, order made by ministers

4. Certain members of society are governed by special rules in their profession.

Eg: Lawyers, Doctors etc…

Article 14 permits classification but prohibits class legislation

The equal protection of laws does not mean that all laws are general in character. It
does not mean that the same laws should apply to all persons. It does not mean that every law
must have universal application for; all persons are not, by nature, attainment or
circumstances in the same position. The varying needs of different classes of persons often
require separate treatment. From the very nature of society there should be different laws in
different places and the Legislature controls the policy and enacts laws in the best interest of
the safety and security of the State. In fact, identical treatment in unequal circumstances
would amount to inequality. So, a reasonable classification is only permitted but is necessary
if society is to progress. Thus Article 14 forbids class-legislation but it does not forbid
reasonable classification.

The classification, however, must not be “arbitrary, artificial or evasive” but must be
based on some real and substantial distinction bearing a just and reasonable relation to the
object sought to be achieved by the legislation. Article 14 applies where equals are treated
differently without any reasonable basis. But where equals and unequals are treated
differently, Article 14 does not apply. Class legislation is that which makes an improper
discrimination by conferring particular privileges upon a class of persons arbitrarily selected
from large number of persons, all of whom stand in the same relation to the privilege granted
that between whom and the persons not so favoured no reasonable distinction or substantial
difference can be found justifying the inclusion of one and the exclusion of the other from
such privilege.

Test for reasonable classification:

The classification to be reasonable must fulfil the following conditions:

a. The classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which

distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of
the group; and
b. The differentia must have a rational relation to the object to be sought to be
achieved by the Act.
The differentia which is the basis of the classification and the object of the Act are
two distinct things. What is necessary is that there must be a nexus between the
basis of classification and the object of the Act which makes classification. It is
only when there is no reasonable basis for a classification that legislation making
such classification may be deemed discriminatory.
Case: Dalmia’s Case:

The propositions laid down in this case still holds good governing a valid
classification and are as follows:
1. The law may be constitutional even though it relates to single individual
2. Burden is on him who attacks it to show that there has been a clear transgression of
Constitutional principle
3. The presumption may be rebutted in certain cases by showing on the fact of the
statute, there is no classification at all and no difference peculiar to any individual or
class and not applicable to any other individual or class, and yet the law hits only
particular individual or class.
4. It must be presumed that legislature understands and correctly appreciates the need of
its own people.
5. In order to sustain the presumption of constitutionality court may take into
consideration matters of common knowledge, matters of report, the history of the time
and may assume every state of facts which were existed at the time of the legislation
6. Legislature is free to recognize the degree of harm and may confine its restrictions.
7. While the good faith and knowledge of the existing conditions are presumed, if there
is nothing on the face of the law on which the classification may reasonably regarded
as based, the presumption of constitutionality cannot be carried to the extent of always
holding that there must be some undisclosed and unknown reasons for subjecting
certain individuals or corporations to be hostile or discriminating legislation.
8. The classification may be made on different basis. Eg: geographical etc,,
9. The classification made by the legislature need not be scientifically perfect or
logically complete.
10. There can be discrimination both in the substantive as well as the procedural law.
If the classification satisfies test laid down in the above propositions law will be
declared constitutional. The question whether a classification is reasonable, and
proper or not, must, however, be judged more on commonsense than on legal
subtleties.

Case: Suneel Jatley Vs. State of Haryana.

In this case, the reservation of 25 seats for admission to M.B.B.S. and B.D.S.
course for students who were educated from Classes I to VIII in common rural
schools was held to be violate of Art. 14 and invalid as classification between the
rural educated and urban educated students for this purpose was wholly arbitrary and
irrational having no nexus to the object sought to be achieved of providing extra
facilities to the students coming from rural schools to enter medical college.
The Government prescribes same standard of education, equipment, grants
and facilities including the qualifications of the staff for being employed in urban and
rural schools imparting instructions from first to eight standards. Thus all the students
are similarly placed and the classification made is not constitutionally valid.
Conclusion:

The Article 14 of the Constitution provides for rule of law, i.e., equality of law and
equal protection of law. It permits classification but it prohibits class legislation. If they want
to make a classification then it should be based on reasonable reasons. If such classification is
not justified then it is considered as unconstitutional.

Q. No. 4. Explain the court of record and appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court.

Ans: Synopsis:

a. Introduction
b. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
c. Court of Record
d. Appellate Jurisdiction
i. Constitutional Matters
ii. Civil Cases
iii. Criminal Cases
iv. Appeal by Special Leave
e. Conclusion

Introduction:

The Judiciary was to be an arm of the social revolution of the social revolution
upholding the equality that Indians had longed for. The Supreme Court is the highest court of
appeal in India. It is considered as the final interpreter and guardian of the Constitution. It is
also considered as the guardian of the Fundamental Rights of the people.

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has following jurisdiction:
a. A Court of Record
b. Original Jurisdiction
c. Appellate Jurisdiction
d. Appeal by Special Leave
e. Advisory Jurisdiction

Court of Record:

Article 129 makes the Supreme Court a ‘court of record & confers all the powers
including the power to punish for its contempt. It is a court whose records are admitted to be
of evidentiary value and they are not to be questioned when they are produced before the
court. The power to punish for its contempt has been expressly conferred on the Supreme
Court by our Constitution. It is exercised when public interest demands. The Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971 defines powers of courts for punishing contempt of courts & regulates their
procedure. Contempt of Court includes both civil & criminal contempt.

Civil Contempt: It means willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction,

order, writ or other process of a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a
court.

Criminal Contempt: It means and includes the publication (whether by words

spoken or written by signs or by visible representation or otherwise) of any matter or
doing of any act whatsoever which–

i. Scandalizes or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any

court, or
ii. Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial
proceedings, or
iii. Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstructs, the
administration of justice in any other manner.

A judge or magistrate or other person acting judicially shall be liable for contempt of
court of his own court or of any other court in the same manner as any other individual is
liable. This will not apply to any observations or remarks made by him regarding a
subordinate court in an appeal or revision pending before him. The following acts will not
amount to contempt:

a. Innocent publications and its distribution

b. Fair & accurate report of judicial proceedings
c. Fair criticism of judicial act
d. Complaint made in good faith against presiding officers or subordinate courts (below
High Court)
e. Publication of fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding before a court sitting in
camera.

Punishment for Contempt: simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to 6 months
or with fine which may extend to Rs. 2000 or with both.

Case: Delhi Judicial Service Assn. Vs. State of Gujarat

It was held that under Art. 129 the Supreme Court has a power to punish a person for
the contempt of itself as well as its subordinate courts. It is the inherent power of the Supreme
Court. It is necessary to safeguard & protect the subordinate judiciary which forms the very
back bone of administration of justice. In this case the Court had sent five police officers to
jail as they were found guilty of criminal contempt for harassing and handcuffing the Chief
Judicial Magistrate of town Nadiad in the State of Gujarat.
Case: Mohd. Aslam Vs. Union of India

The Supreme Court held that the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Mr. Kalyan Singh
was guilty of contempt of court for violating the order of the Court not to allow any
permanent structure on the disputed land. The Chief Minister had given a solemn assurance
to the National Integration Council and also to the Supreme Court that he would not allow
any permanent construction on the land. The Chief Minister took the defence that the
construction was done by the congregation of Sadhus and any attempt to prevent the work
would have created a violent situation endangering the structure itself. The Court however,
took the view that the assurances given by the Chief Minister before the NIC were
incorporated as his own undertaking to the Supreme Court. He did not prevent the
construction work of Sadhus. The Court said that although the State of U.P. was guilty of
contempt, but a Minister or officer of government is in his official capacity or if there is
personal element contributing contempt, in his personal capacity is liable to contempt. The
Court awarded a token sentence of one day and a fine of Rs. 2000 to be paid within two
months.

Appellate Jurisdiction:

SC is the highest court of appeal in the country. The writs & decrees run throughout
the country. Appellate Jurisdiction divided into four main categories:

1. Constitutional Matters
2. Civil matters
3. Criminal matters
4. Special eave to appeal.

1. Appeal in constitutional matters

Under Article 132(1) an appeal shall lie to SC from any judgment, decree or final
order of High Court whether in civil, criminal or other proceedings, if the High Court
certifies under Article 134-A that the case involves a substantial question of law as to
the interpretation of this constitution. Article 134-A is to avoid delay in granting
certificate by the High Court.
Conditions necessary for grant of certificate are as follows:
1. The order appealed must be against a judgment decree or final order made by the
High Court in civil, criminal or other proceedings,
2. The case must involve a question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution,
and
3. If the High Court under Art. 134-A certifies that the case be heard by the Supreme
Court.
Case: The Election Commission Vs. Venkata Rao

In this case the question raised was whether an appeal would lie to SC from a decision
of a single judge. The Supreme Court gave an affirmative answer. But this can be
done in very exceptional cases, where direct appeal to the Supreme Court is necessary
and in view of the great importance of the case an early decision is required in public
interest.

2. Appeal in Civil Cases

Article 133 provides that an appeal shall lie to the SC from any judgment, decree or
final order in civil cases only if HC certifies under Art. 134-A:
a. Involves a substantial question of law
b. That in the opinion of the High Court the said question needs to be decided by the SC.
The value of subject matter must not be less than Rs.20,000/-.

The word civil proceeding means proceedings in which a party asserts the existence
of a civil rights. A civil proceeding is one in which a person seeks to remedy by an
appropriate process the alleged infringement of his civil rights against another person
or the State and which, if the claim is proved, would result in the declaration, express
or implied, of the right claimed and relief, such as, payment of debt, damages,
compensation, etc…

Case: M.M.B. Catholics Vs. T. Paulo Avira

The Supreme Court interfered with the findings of fact made by the High Court on the
ground that the conclusions of High Court were based on misleading evidence and
that important material evidence was ignored. In this case the findings of the High
Court were different from those of the trial. In an appeal under Article 133 the
appellant cannot be allowed to raise new grounds not raised before the lower court.

3. Appeal in Criminal Cases:

An appeal lies to SC from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal
proceeding of a HC in the following two ways:-
1. Without a certificate of HC—Under Art.134(b) an appeal lies to the Supreme
Court without the certificate of High Court in following two ways:
a. Has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him
to death.
b. Has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its
authority and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him to
death. But if the HC has reversed the order of conviction and ordered for acquittal
then no appeal would lie to Supreme Court.
2. With a Certificate—Under Article 134(c) provides that the Power of the High
Court to grant fitness certificate in the criminal cases is a discretionary power, but
 the discretion is a judicially exercised along with the well established lines which
govern these matters.
4. Appeal by special leave—
Under Article 136 the Supreme Court is authorised to grant in its discretion special
leave to appeal from:
(a) Any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order
(b) In any cause or matter passed or
(c) Made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India.
The only exception to this power of the Supreme Court is with regard to any
judgement, etc., of any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the
Armed forces. The power given under this Article is residuary powers which are
exercisable outside the purview of ordinary law.

Conclusion:
Thus, the Supreme Court is considered as the protector of Fundamental
Rights. It has different jurisdiction to try the case. Supreme Court is a court of record
where it has a right to punish the person for the contempt of court and protects its
subordinate courts from such contempt. It has the appellate jurisdiction where it has a
power to hear the appeal case from the lower courts. Supreme Court is considered as a
highest appeal court of India.

Q. No. 5. Briefly explain the constitutional remedies for the enforcement of fundamental
rights under the constitution? Discuss.

Ans: Synopsis:

a. Introduction
b. Constitutional Remedies
c. Case laws
d. Conclusion

Introduction:

It is true that Fundamental Rights is meaningless unless there is effective machinery

for the enforcement of such right. The Constitutional Remedy which makes the right real. If
there is no remedy there is no right at all. Fundamental Rights have provided for an effective
remedy for the enforcement of these Rights under Art. 32 of the Constitution is itself a
fundamental right. Article 226 also empowers all the High Courts to issue the writs for the
enforcement of fundamental Rights.
Constitutional Remedies:

There is no right without a remedy. The protector or the guardian of the fundamental
rights is the Supreme Court. When the rights are violated it can be challenged in the Court of
law. The provisions for the enforcement of the remedies is are as follows:

Art. 32(1) -- Guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court by “appropriate proceedings”
for the enforcement of the fundamental rights conferred by Part-III of the Constitution.

Art. 32(2) -- Confers power on the Supreme Court to issue appropriate directions or orders or
writs, including writs in the nature of ------

a. Habeas corpus,

b. Mandamus

c. Prohibition

d. Quo-warranto

e. Certiorari

Article 32(3) provides that Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise
within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or of the powers exercisable by the Supreme
Court under clause (2)

Article 32(4) Provides that the right guaranteed by Art.32 shall not be suspended except as
otherwise provided in the Constitution.

Thus Article 32 provides for an expeditious and inexpensive remedy for the protection of
fundamental rights from legislative and executive interference.

Writs and Types of Writs:

It is a legal document from a court telling to do or not to do. The Supreme Court has a
jurisdiction to issue the writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights. Under Art.226 High
Court may issue writs– not only for fundamental rights but also for other purpose.

1. Habeas Corpus—It is a Latin term which means “You may have the body”. The
writ is issued in form of an order calling upon a person by whom another person is
detained to bring that person before the court and let Court know by what
authority he has detained that person. The general rule is that an application can
be made by a person who is legally detained. But in certain cases it can be applied
by any person on behalf of the prisoner, i.e., a friend or the relative.

Case: Kanu Sanyal Vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling

Facts: The top-ranking Naxalite leader Case: Kanu Sanyal was arrested in 1971 and
was detained without trial in the Vishakapatanam Jail. He moved the Supreme Court for a
writ under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the legality of his detentions and
 praying for the Court’s order for his production before the Court. The court issued the
rule nisi but not the production of the detenue. Counsel appearing for the detenue
contended the production of the body of person alleged to be illegally detained was an
essential feature of writ of habeas corpus under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Decision: It was held by the Supreme Court that the production of the body of the
person alleged to be unlawfully detained was not essential feature of the writ of
habeas corpus.

2. Mandamus— It means “the order”. It is thus an order by a superior court

commanding a person or a public authority (including the government and public
corporation) to do or forbear to do something in the nature of public duty or in
cases of statutory duty.
Case: State of M.P Vs. Mandawara
In this case the M.P. Government made a rule making it discretionary to grant
dearness allowance to the employees at a particular rate. The Supreme Court held
that the writ of mandamus could be issued to compel the Government to exercise
its power.
Mandamus does not lie against a private individual or any private organisation to
exercise power.

3. Prohibition– It is issued primarily to prevent an inferior court or tribunal from

exceeding its jurisdiction, or acting contrary to the natural justice. It is issued by
superior court to inferior court for the purpose of preventing inferior Courts from
usurping a jurisdiction with which it was not legally vested, or in other words to
compel inferior courts to keep within the limits of their jurisdiction.

4. Certiorari— It is issued by a Superior Court (Supreme Court & High Courts) to

an inferior court or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions to remove
a suit from such inferior court or body & adjudicate upon the validity of the
proceedings or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions. It is used to
quash an order when such order made without jurisdiction or in violation of rules
of natural justice.

Grounds on which writ can be issued.

a. Where there is want of excess of jurisdiction.

b. Where there is error of law apparent on the face of the record but not error of a
fact.
c. Where there is violation of procedure or disregards of principles of natural justice.

5. Quo Warranto– It means ‘what is your authority’. By this writ a holder of an

office is called upon to show to the court under what authority he holds the office.
The object is to prevent a person to hold the office which he not legally entitled to
hold.
 Case: Arya Samaj Sabha Vs. Dr. D. Ram
The High Court refused to issue a writ of quo warranto against the members of the
working committee of the Bihar Arya Samaj Sabha, a private association.

Who can apply?

a. Locus Standi
The traditional rule is that the right to move the Supreme Court is only available
to those whose fundamental rights are infringed. The power vested in the Supreme Court
can only be exercised for the enforcement of fundamental rights. The writ under which
the remedy is asked under Article 32 must be correlated to one of the fundamental rights
sought to be enforced. The remedy must sought through appropriate proceedings.

b. Public Interest Litigation

The traditional concept of Locus standi considerably relaxed. The court now permits
public interest litigations or social interest litigations at the instance of ‘Public
Spirited Citizens’ for the enforcement of Constitutional & other legal rights of any
person or group of persons who are because of their poverty or socially or
economically disadvantaged position are unable to approach the court for the relief.

Case: A.B.S.K. Sangh (Rly) Vs. Union of India

In this case it was held that the Akil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh
(Railway), through an unregistered association could maintain a writ petition under
Article 32 gives for the redressal of a common grievance. The access to justice
through ‘class actions’, ‘public interest litigations’ and ‘representative proceedings’ is
the present constitutional jurisprudence.

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM

The concept of judicial activism is another name for innovative interpretation not the
recent one. It is an act of Judge to fill up the gaps, doubts because the provisions of the
constitution are couched normally in general terms to give them adaptability & elasticity. The
final burden of interpreting those elastic provisions is upon courts. Judicial Activism was
made possible in India because of Public Interest Litigation. Generally speaking the person
whose legal rights have to approach the court for remedies. But this has been widened; any
public spirited person can approach the court for protection of such rights.

Case: Bandhu Mukthi Morcha vs. Union of India

It has been held that the provisions conferring on the Supreme Court Power to enforce
fundamental rights in the widest possible terms show the anxiety of the Constitution makers
not to allow any procedural technicalities to stand in the way of enforcement of fundamental
rights.
Conclusion:

Thus Article 32 considered as “Soul and Heart” of the Indian Constitution, without
which this Constitution would be nullity. If there is a right without a remedy or such
enforcing machinery then such right is not at all a right. So there should be someone who
protects these rights. So the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution are
protected by the Judiciary.

Q. No. 6. Discuss the Provisions regarding different kinds of emergencies under the
Indian Constitution.

Ans: Synopsis:

a. Introduction
b. Types of Emergency—
1. National Emergency (Art. 352)
2. State Emergency (Art. 356) and
3. Financial Emergency (Art. 360)
c. Case Laws
d. Conclusion
Introduction:

Indian Constitution is generally a Federal Constitution. But one of its important

characteristic is the way in which the normal federal Constitution can be adapted to
emergency situation. It is the merit of the Constitution that it visualises the circumstances
when the strict application of the federal principles might destroy the basic assumptions on
which our Constitution is built. The object of emergency is to strengthen the country with
adequate powers to face the situation, and to save the country from tire problems.

The Constitution of India provides for three types of Emergency. They are as follows:

1. National Emergency (Art. 352)

2. State Emergency (Art. 356) and
3. Financial Emergency (Art. 360)

1. National Emergency:
Art -352 provides that if the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists
whereby the security of India or any part of India is threatened, either by war or
external aggression or armed rebellion, he may make a Proclamation of Emergency in
respect of the whole of India or any part of India as may be specified in the
Proclamation. The Proclamation of Emergency made may be varied or revoked by the
President by a subsequent Proclamation.
 A Proclamation of Emergency can be made even before the actual Occurrence of
the event mentioned in Art. 352 have taken place. If the President is satisfied that
there is imminent danger of war or external aggression or armed rebellion he can
make the proclamation of emergency.

The President shall not issue a Proclamation of unless the decision of the Union
Cabinet (i.e. the Council consisting of the Prime Minister and the other Ministers of
cabinet rank) that such a Proclamation may be declared only on the concurrence of the
cabinet, and not merely on the advice of the Prime Minister as was done by the Prime
Minister.

Procedure for Proclamation of Emergency:

1. The Proclamation of National Emergency must be laid before each House of

Parliament and it shall cease to be in operation at the expiration of one month
unless before the expiry of one month it has been approved by resolution of both
Houses of Parliament.
2. If the Proclamation of Emergency is issued at a time when the Lok Sabha has
been dissolved or the dissolution takes place during the period of one month
referred to above, without approving the Proclamation but the Proclamation has
been approved by the Rajya Sabha, the Proclamation shall cease to be operate at
the expiration of 30 days from the date on which the Lok Sabha sits after fresh
election.
3. A resolution approving the Proclamation must be passed by the special majority
that is by a majority of the total members of each House and also by a majority of
not less than 2/3 of the members present and voting in each house.
4. Prior to 44th Amendment, such resolution could be passed by Parliament by a
simple majority.
5. A proclamation once approved by Parliament shall remain in force for a period of
six months from the date of the passing of the second resolution approving it,
unless revoked earlier.
6. For the further continuance of the emergency beyond the period of six months
approval by Parliament would be required every six months.

Grounds of declaring Emergency:

1. Security of India or any part thereof is threatened either by war or external aggression
or armed rebellion.
2. Prior to 44th Amendment one of the ground for emergency was “internal
disturbances”. These words are vague and gave wide discretion to the Executive to
declare emergency even on a flimsy grounds.
3. In 1975, the emergency was declared on the ground of internal disturbance by the
then P.M. Indira Gandhi.
 Indira Gandhi v/s Raj Naraian:
In 1975, the emergency was declared on the ground of internal disturbance by the
then P.M. Indira Gandhi because the opposition parties had given a call to launch a
movement with a view to compelling the P.M. to resign from her post as her election
to Lok Sabha was declared void by the Allahabad High Court.

4. The 44th Amendment Act 1978, the phrase Internal Disturbance in Article 352 was
removed. So that in future no Central Government can misuse the power under the
Proclamation of Emergency.

5. The 44th Amendment substituted the words “armed rebellion” for the words “internal
disturbance”.
6. The “Satisfaction” that the security of India is threatened or there is an imminent
danger of its being threatened by war or internal aggression or armed rebellion is the
“subjective satisfaction” of the President and cannot be challenged in a court of law
and even on ground the opinion of the president had been actuated by mala fides.

Case: Minerva Mills Ltd. vs. Union of India

It was held that there is no bar to judicial review of the validity of a proclamation of
Emergency issued by the President. Merely because a question has a political complexion, it
is no ground why the court should shrink from performing its duty under the constitution if it
raises an issue of constitutional determination. The satisfaction of the President is condition
precedent and if it can be shown that there is no satisfaction at all, the satisfaction is absurd or
perverse or mala fide or based by wholly extraneous and irrelevant ground, it would be liable
to be challenged before a court of law.

Effects of Proclamation Of Emergency:

The followings are the consequences or the effects of the Proclamation of Emergency:

1. Extension of Centre’s Executive Power (Art-353).

During the operation of a Proclamation of emergency the executive power of the
Union shall extends to giving directions to any State as to the manner in which the
executive power of the State is to be exercised.
2. Parliament empowered to legislate on State subjects (Art- 353[b]).
During the operation of a Proclamation of Emergency, the Union is empowered to
make laws with respect to any of the matters in the State List. The law- making power
of the State is not suspended during the emergency. The State can make law but it is
subject to the overriding power of the Union Parliament.
 3. Centre empowered to alter distribution of revenue between the Union and the
State (Art-354).
The President may, while a proclamation of emergency is in operation by the order
after the financial arrangement between the State and the Union. Every such order is
to be laid each House of Parliament and will come to an end by the end of the
financial year in which the Proclamation of Emergency ceases to operate.

4. Extension of life of Lok Sabha (Art- 83).

While the Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the President may extend the
normal life of the Lok Sabha by a year each time upto a period not exceeding beyond
six months after Proclamation ceases to operate.

5. Suspension of fundamental rights guaranteed by (Art- 19).

Art 358 provides for suspension of the six freedoms guaranteed to the citizens by Art
19 of the Constitution. It says that while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation
nothing in Art 19 shall restrict the power of the State to make any law or to take any
executive action abridging or taking away the rights guaranteed by Article 19 of the
Constitution. It means that as soon as the Proclamation of Emergency is made the
freedoms guaranteed by Art.19 are automatically suspended.

Case Laws:

M. M. Pathak v/s Union of India

In this case the Supreme Court opined that the Article 14 and 19 shall not be suspended
during emergency, but only their operation would be suspended during emergency, as soon as
the Emergency, lifted out, Article 14 and 19 come into life, and would strike down any
legislation which have been valid. The declaration of validity was stayed during the
emergency. It did not mean that the settlement was washed away. As soon as the emergency
is lifted, the settlement would revive.

2. State Emergency :
If the President, on receipt of a report from the Governor of a State or otherwise, is
satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the State cannot be
carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution, the President may by
Proclamation—

(a) Assume to himself all or any of the functions of the Government of the State and
all or any of the powers vested in or exercisable by the Governor or anybody or
authority in the State other than the Legislature of the State;

(b) Declare that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or
under the authority of Parliament;
 (c) Make such incidental and consequential provisions as appear to the President to
be necessary or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation.

The President cannot, however, assume to himself any of the powers vested in or exercisable
by a High Court, or to suspend in whole or in part the operation of any provision of this
Constitution relating to High Courts.

The Proclamation can be varied or revoked by subsequent proclamation by the President. The
word satisfaction does not mean the personal satisfaction of the President but of the Cabinet.
The satisfaction of the President can be challenged under two grounds:

a. It has been exercised mala fide,

b. Based on wholly extraneous and irrelevant grounds.

Art. 365 provides that the President may act on a report of the governor or otherwise. This
means the President can act even without the Governor’s report, if he is satisfied that such
events occurred in a state, which involve the special responsibility placed upon the Centre to
maintain the State under the Constitution.

A proclamation issued shall be laid before each House of Parliament and shall remain in
operation for ‘two months’ unless before the expiry of that period it has been approved by
both Houses of Parliament. If any such proclamation issued at the time when Lok Sabha is
dissolved or the dissolution takes place during the period of two months and the Proclamation
is passed by Rajya Sabha but not by Lok Sabha, the proclamation shall cease to operate at the
expiry of 30days from the date on which new Lok Sabha meets after the reconstruction unless
before such expiration it has been passed by Lok Sabha.

If the Proclamation is approved by the Parliament it will remain in operation for the period of
six months. Parliament may extend such duration, but no such Proclamation shall in any case
remain in force for more than three years. After expiration of the maximum period of three
years, neither the Parliament nor the President shall have power to continue a Proclamation
and the constitutional machinery must be restored to the State.

Case: S.R Bommai vs. Union of India

The Supreme Court held that the dismissal of the BJP Governments in Madhya
Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh in the wake of the Ayodhya incident of Dec. 6,
1992 was valid and imposition of the President’s rule in these States was Constitutional. The
Court held that “secularism” is a basic feature of the Constitution and any State Government
which acts against the ideal can be dismissed by the President. It was held that in matters of
religion the State has no place. No political party can simultaneously be a religious party as
well as a political party.

President’s Rule in Karnataka (Oct. 2007)

In Assembly elections no party secured requisite majority to form the government.

The BJP was the single largest party. The Congress, against which was the people’s mandate,
forged a coalition with Janata Dal of Kumar Swami. After sometime the coalition failed.
However, Kumar Swami formed a coalition with BJP. It was agreed that they would hold the
Chief Ministership term wise. But Kumar Swami in his term rejected this agreement. The
President’s Rule was imposed and the Assembly was kept in suspended animation. But after
sometime Kumar Swami agreed to support the BJP, but they imposed twelve conditions to
support the government in the Assembly at the time of vote of confidence. The BJP Chief
Minster tendered his resignation and the President rule was again imposed and the Assembly
was dissolved.

3. Financial Emergency:
Article 360 provides that if the President is satisfied that a situation has arisen
whereby the financial stability or credit of India or of any part of the territory thereof
is threatened, he may by a Proclamation make a declaration to that effect.
A Proclamation issued:
(a) May be revoked or varied by a subsequent Proclamation;
(b) Shall be laid before each House of Parliament;
(c) Shall cease to operate at the expiration of two months, unless before the expiration of that
period it has been approved by resolutions of both Houses of Parliament

During the period when such a proclamation is in operation, the executive authority of the
union shall extend to the giving directions to any State to observe such canons of financial
propriety as may be specified in the directions and be deemed necessary by the President for
maintaining financial stability and the credit of the state. Any such direction may include a
provision for the reduction of salaries and allowances of all or any class of persons serving in
a State, including the Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. It may also require that
all Money or Financial Bill is to be reserved for the consideration of the President after they
are passed by the legislature of the State.

Conclusion:
Thus during proclamation Indian federal feature of Constitution vitiates and it acts as
Unitary Government. This is done in the interest of the State. During emergency the Central
or Union has the overriding effect upon the laws made by the State and the Union will pevail
over the state laws.
Q.No. 7. Examine the administrative, legislative relations between Centre & State.
Ans: Synopsis:
a. Introduction
b. Types of relations
c. Administrative relations
d. Legislative relations
e. Conclusion

Introduction:

One of the essential features of federalism is distribution of powers between the

Union and the State. The object involves a division of authority between the National
Government and the separate states. A federal Constitution establishes the dual polity with
the Union at the centre and the States at a periphery, each endowed with sovereign powers to
be exercised in the field assigned to them respectively by the Constitution. The one is not
subordinate to the other in its own field; the authority of one is coordinate with that of the
other. In fact, the basic principle of federation is that the legislative, executive and financial
authority is divided between the Centre and State not by any law passed by the Centre but by
Constitution itself.

The relations between the Centre and State can be discussed under three headings:

A. Legislative Relations
B. Administrative Relations
C. Financial Relations

A. Legislative Relations
The Constitution of India make two fold distribution of legislative powers—

1. With respect to territory;

2. With respect to subject matter.

1. Territorial Jurisdiction
According to 245(1), Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, Parliament may
make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India.
(2) No law made by Parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that it
would have extra-territorial operation.

Case: A.H. Wadia vs. Income-tax Commissioner, Bombay

In this case the Supreme Court held: In case of a sovereign legislature question of
extra-territoriality of any enactment can never be raised in the municipal court as a
ground for challenging its validity. The legislation may offend the rules of
international law, may not be recognized by foreign courts, or there may be practical
 difficulties in enforcing them but these are questions of policy with which the
domestic tribunals are concerned.

The legislative powers of the Parliament and the State Legislature are subject to the
provisions of the Constitution, viz. (1) the scheme of distribution of powers, (2) Fundamental
Rights, (3) other provisions of the Constitution.

Theory of Territorial Nexus

The legislature of the State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State [Art.
245(1)]. This means that State Laws would be void if it has extra-territorial operation i.e.,
takes effect outside the State. However there is one exception to this general rule. A State law
of extra-territorial operation will be valid if there is sufficient nexus between the object and
the State.

Case: Wallace Vs. Income-Tax Commissioner, Bombay

A company which was registered in England was a partner in a firm in India. The
Indian Income tax authorities sought to tax the entire income made by the company. The
Privy Council applied the doctrine of territorial nexus and held the levy of tax valid. It said
that the derivation from British India of major part of its income for a year gave to a company
for that year gave to a company for that year sufficient territorial connection to justify its
being treated as at home in India for all purposes of tax on its income for that year from
whatever source income may be derived.

Legislative Power is plenary

The power to make laws is a plenary power subject only to legislative competence
and other constitutional limitations. The power to make a law includes the power to give
effect to it prospectively as well as retrospectively. The Legislature has power to alter the
existing law retrospectively. The power to validate a law retrospectively is, subject to other
constitutional limitations.

Legislative arbitrariness

Whenever, there is arbitrariness in State action whether it is of the legislature or of the

executive, Art. 14 springs into action and strikes down such action. A law cannot be declared
ultra vires on the ground of the hardship but can be done so on the ground of total
unreasonableness.
Delegated legislation

Delegated or subordinate legislation may be defined as rules of law made under the
authority of an Act of Parliament. Although laws are to be made by the Legislature, but the
legislature by statute delegate such power to other persons or bodies. Such a statute is known
as “the enabling Act” and lays down the broad principles and leaves the detailed rules to be
provided by regulations made by a Minister or other persons. Delegated legislation exists in
the form of rules, regulations, orders and bye laws.

Factors responsible for the growth of delegated Legislation

1. Pressure on Parliamentary time

2. Technicality of subject-matter
3. Opportunity for experimentation
4. Unforeseen contingencies
5. Emergency Powers

Limits: The limit has been set out from various decisions given by the court. The legislature
cannot delegate its essential legislative functions which consist in declaring the legislative
policy and laying down the standard which is to be enacted into a rule of law. The courts
cannot interfere in the discretion vested in the legislature in determining the extent of the
delegated power in a particular case.

Need to control exercise of delegated legislation

The power delegated might be misused so the following are some of the modes to control the
delegated legislation:

1. Judicial Control.
2. Parliamentary Control.

1. Judicial Control:
The courts have power to consider whether the delegated or subordinate
legislation is consistent with the provisions of the ‘enabling Act’. Their validity can
be challenged on the ground of ultra vires i.e., beyond the competence of the
Legislature. The Court can declare the parent Act unconstitutional on the ground of
excessive delegation or violation of fundamental rights or it is against the scheme of
distribution of Legislative Powers. The parent Act may be constitutional but the
delegated legislation emanating from it may come in conflict with some provisions of
the Constitution and hence it can be declared unconstitutional.
 2. Parliamentary Control:
It is the primary duty of the Legislature to supervise and control the exercise
of delegated power by the executive authorities. Parliamentary control over the
delegated legislation is exercised at three stages. They are as follows:

a. The stage when power is delegated to the subordinate authorities by

Parliament. This stage comes when the Bill is introduced in the
Legislature.
b. It is when the rules made under the statute are laid before the Houses of
Parliament through the committee on subordinate legislation. The
committee on subordinate legislation scrutinises the rules framed by the
executive and submits its report to the Legislature if the rules are beyond
the permissible limits of delegation.
c. These rules are laid before the Legislature and debated in the legislature.
If they are ultra vires questions may be put to the Minister concerned and
if necessary even a motion of censure on the Minister responsible for the
rules and regulations may be moved.
The Supreme Court held that unless the delegated legislation is published it
cannot be enforced. This is adopted to safeguard against the misuse of delegated
legislation.

2. Distribution of Legislative Power by Subject matter

In federal system there is a distribution of power between Central and the States. The
nature of distribution varies according to the local and political background of the country.
The Constitution of India divides the power between Union and the States in three Lists.
They are:

a. The Union List,

b. The State List, and
c. The Concurrent List.

Art. 246 is related to subject-matter of law making power of Parliament and State
Legislatures. It is as follows:

(1) Notwithstanding anything in clauses (2) and (3), Parliament has exclusive power to make
laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List I in the Seventh Schedule (in this
Constitution referred to as the“Union List”).

(2) Notwithstanding anything in clause (3), Parliament, and, subject to clause (1), the
Legislature of any State also, have power to make laws with respect to any of the matters
enumerated in List III in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the
“Concurrent List”).
(3) Subject to clauses (1) and (2), the Legislature of any State has exclusive power to make
laws for such State or any part thereof with respect to any of the matters enumerated in List II
in the Seventh Schedule (in this Constitution referred to as the “State List”).

(4) Parliament has power to make laws with respect to any matter for any part of the territory
of India not included in a State notwithstanding that such matter is a matter enumerated in the
State List.

The Union List consists of 97 subjects. The subjects mentioned in the Union List are of
national importance, i.e., defence, foreign affairs, banking currency and coinage, union duties
and taxes.

The State List consists of 66 subjects. They are of a local importance, such as, public
fisheries, education, State taxes and duties. The States have exclusive power to make laws on
subjects mentioned in the State List.

The Concurrent List consists of 47 subjects. Both Centre and States can make laws on the
subjects mentioned therein. But in case of conflict between the Central and State Law on
concurrent subjects, the Central law will prevail. The concurrent list is not found in the
Federal Constitution. The framers added this list with a view to secure uniformity in the main
principles of law throughout the country.

The Residuary Powers

Under Art.248 (1) Parliament has exclusive power to make any law with respect to
any matter not enumerated in the Concurrent List or State List.

(2) Such power shall include the power of making any law imposing a tax not mentioned in
either of those Lists.

Principles of Interpretation of Lists

The power of Centre and States are divided. They cannot make laws outside their allotted
subjects. The scientific division is not possible and there may raise the question whether a
particular subject falls in the sphere of one or the other government. This duty is vested in the
Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court has evolved the following principles of
interpretation in order to determine the respective power of the Union and the States under
the three Lists:

1. Predominance of the Union List

Art. 246 expressly secure the predominance of the Union List over the State
List and the Concurrent List and that Concurrent List over the State List.
2. Each Entry to be interpreted broadly
Subject to the overriding predominance of the Union List, entry in the various
lists should be interpreted broadly.

Case: Union of India Vs. H.S. Dhillon

The question involved in this case was whether Parliament had legislative
competence to pass Wealth-Tax Act imposing wealth-tax on the assets of a person
in agricultural land. The Court held that in case of a Central Legislation the proper
test was to inquire whether the matter fell in List-II (State List) or List-III
(Concurrent List). Once it is found that the matter does not fall under List-II,
Parliament will be competent to legislative on it under its residuary power in
Entry 97 of List I. In such a case it becomes immaterial whether it falls under
Entries 1-96 of List or not.

3. Pith and Substance

Within their respective spheres, the Union and State Legislature are made
supreme and they should not encroach into the sphere reserved to the other. If a
law passed by one, encroach the other then Court will apply the doctrine of pith
and substance to determine whether the legislature concerned competent to make
it. If the pith and substance of law, i.e., the true object of the legislation or a
statute, relates to a matter with the competence of legislature which enacted it, it
should be held to be intra vires even though it might incidentally trench on matters
not within the competence of Legislature.

Case: Prafulla Kumar Mukerjee Vs. Bank of Khulna

In this case the validity of the Bengal Money Lenders’ Act 1946, which
limited the amount and the rate of interest recoverable by a money-lender on any loan
was challenged on the ground that it is ultra vires of the Bengal legislature. It is
because it is related to ‘Promissory Note’ which was the Central Subject.

The Privy Council held that the Bengal Money-lenders’ Act was in pith and
substance a law in respect of money-lending and money-lenders-a state subject and
was valid even though it trenched incidentally on “Promissory Note”- a central
subject.

4. Colourable Legislation
The constitution distributes the power amongst different legislative bodies,
which have to act within their respective spheres. It cannot transgress the limits of
its constitutional powers. The legislature cannot violate the constitutional
prohibitions by employing indirect methods. “Colourability” is thus bound up
 with incompetency and not tainted with bad faith or evil motive. A thing is
colourable which in appearance only and not in reality, what it purports to be.
Thus the whole doctrine of colourable legislation is based upon the maxim that
“you cannot do indirectly what you cannot do directly”. In these cases court will
look in the true nature and character of the legislation and for its object, purpose
or design to make law on a subject relevant and not its motive. If the Legislation
has power to make law, motive in a making the law is “irrelevant”.

Case: State of Bihar Vs. Kameshwar Singh

This is the only case where a law has been declared invalid on the ground of
colourable legislation. In this case the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, was held
void on the ground that though apparently purported to lay down principle for
determining compensation yet in reality it did not lay down any such principle and
thus indirectly sought to deprive the petitioner of any compensation.

Parliament’s power to legislate on State Subjects

Though in normal times the distribution of power must be strictly maintained and
neither the state nor the Centre can encroach upon the sphere allotted to the other by the
Constitution, yet in certain exceptional circumstances the above system of distribution is
either suspend or the powers of the Union Parliament are extended over the subjects
mentioned in the State List. The exceptional circumstances are:

1. Power of parliament to legislate in the national interests:

2. During a proclamation of Emergency:
3. Parliament’s power to legislate with the consent of the States:
4. Parliaments power to legislate for giving to treaties and international agreements:
5. In case of failure of constitutional machinery in a State:

B. Administrative Relations

The adjustment of administrative relations between the Union and the States is one of
the main problems in a federal government. The framers of the Indian Constitution therefore
decided to include detailed provisions to avoid clashes between the Centre and the States in
the administrative domain and to ensure effective Federal Executive control of matters falling
within the jurisdiction of the Parliament. In order to ensure smooth and proper functioning to
the administrative machinery, they made provisions for meeting all types of eventualities
resulting through the working of federalism or emergence of new circumstances due to
difference of opinion between the dual authorities.
Control of Union over States:

Articles 256 to 263 provide for Union control over the Sates even in normal times
through following ways:

(a) Direction by the Union to the State Governments.

(b) Delegation of Union functions to the States.
(c) All India Services.
(d) Grants –in- aid.

a. Direction by the Union to the State Governments.

The idea of the Union giving direction to the States is foreign and repugnant to a rule
of federal system. But this idea was taken by the framers of our Constitution from the
Government of India Act, 1935.

Art. 256. Provides the executive power of every State shall be so exercised as to
ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and any existing laws which apply
in that State, and the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of such
directions to a State as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that
purpose.

Art. 257. The executive power of every State shall be so exercised as not to impede or
prejudice the exercise of the executive power of the Union, and the executive power of
the Union shall extend to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the
Government of India to be necessary for that purpose. The executive power of the Union
shall also extend to the giving of directions to a State in two specific aspects

(i) As to the construction and maintenance of means of communication declared in

the direction to be of national or military importance.
(ii) Measures to be taken for the protection of the railways within the State.

(b) Delegation of Union functions to the States.

Under Article 258 the President may, with the consent of the Government of a
State, entrust either conditionally or unconditionally to that Government or to its
officers functions in relation to any matter to which the executive power of the Union
extends. Parliament is also empowered to use State machinery for the enforcement of
Union Laws and for this purpose may confer power or impose duties upon the State or
its officers or authorities thereof in respect of these matters to see that the laws are
made applicable to the State. It is to be noted that while the delegation of power is
made with the consent of the State the consent of the State is not necessary the
delegation can be made by Parliament by law.

If a law is passed delegating powers and imposing duties, it would be the duty
of the officers of the State to implement the law. Thus, Parliament can interfere in
 internal administration of the States even without the consent of the State. This
constitutes a great encroachment on the autonomy of the State, and reduces the States
as mere agents of the centre.

(c) All-India Service—

Besides the separate services for the Union and the States the constitution
provides for the creation of an additional “All-India Service” common to the Union
and the States. According to Art. 312 if the Rajya Sabha passes a resolution supported
by not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting that it is necessary or
expedient in the nation’s interest to do so, Parliament may by law provide for the
creation of one or more All-India Services common to the conditions of persons
appointed to any service. The object of this provision is to ensure greater inter-state
co-ordination and implementation of the policies of the central government through
these officers. This also enables the Central Government to exercise a control over
State in matters of execution of Union Laws.

d. Grants-in-aid
Under the Constitution the financial resources of the State are very limited
though they have to do many works of social uplift under directive principles. In order
to cope with their ever-expanding needs, the Central Government makes grants-in-aid
to the States. Grants-in-aid thus serve two purposes:

1. Though it Central Government exercises a strict control over the States

because grants are grants are granted subject to certain conditions. If any
state does not agree to the condition the Central Government may
withdraw the grant, and
2. It generates a Centre-State co-ordination and co-operation if a state wants
to develop its welfare schemes for the people of the State it may ask for
financial help from the Centre.

(e) Full faith and credit clause-

Art. 261 declares that full faith and credit shall be given throughout the
territory of India to public acts, records and judicial proceedings of the
Union and every state. The final judgement or orders delivered or
passed by civil courts in any part of the territory of India can be
executed anywhere in the country according to law.
Conclusion:

Though a Federal Constitution involves the sovereignty of the units within their
respective territorial limits it is not possible for them to remain in complete isolation from
each other and the very exercise of internal sovereignty by the units require its recognition by
and co-ordination of other units of the federation. Federation Constitutions therefore
generally provide certain rules for co-operation which the units are expected to take in to
consideration while dealing with each other. This co-ordination between the States and the
Centre is called co-operative federalism.

Q.No.8. Write short notes on any two of the following: 8x2=16

a. Expost Facto Law

Ex post facto law is explained under Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution. It
provides that “No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in
force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a
penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the
time of the commission of the offence”

It imposes limitation on the law-making power of the legislature. Legislature can

make prospective & retrospective law. But it prohibits legislature to make retrospective
criminal laws. It does not prohibit imposition of civil liability retrospectively for Eg: Tax
can be imposed retrospectively. Ex post facto law is law which imposes penalties
retrospectively, i.e., on act already done & increases penalties for such act. No person
shall be convicted of any offence except for the violation of ‘law in force’ at the time of
commission of offence

Case: Pareed Lubha Vs. Nilambaram

It was held that if the non-payment of the Panchayat Tax was not an offence on the
day it fell due, the defaulter could not be convicted for the omission to pay under a law
passed subsequently even if it covered older dues.

Under this Article, the protection is available to those against conviction &
sentence for a criminal offence but for under trial. In American constitution it gives
protection to under trial also. Second part of clause (1) provides that a penalty greater
than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the
offence.

Case: Kedar Nath VS. State of West Bengal

A person he committed offence in 1947 under Act it was punishable for

imprisonment and fine or both. In 1949 they enhanced the punishment for the same
offence. It was held that the enhanced punishment could not be applicable to the act
committed by the accused in 1947 and hence set aside the additional fine imposed by the
amended Act.
 b. Judicial Process
The Judiciary in India is not merely an adjudicator but performs more
important functions as authoritative interpreter of the Constitution. Judgment is a
process of mind that some claim to know and others continue to discover. Each
judgment is either a step forward or backward in the development of law. As a result,
since each judgment is the product of the minds of several individuals, how each
understands and interprets the law will be different but these judgments cannot avoid
being vital force in law.
Cardozo in describing the judicial method says that it is the judge as well as
the legislator who steer by the light of social welfare. Legislature makes the Law. But
this law is not always perfect, like no man by nature is perfect. Perfection is only
attributed to god. Judges fill such gap in law and this is called as judicial darning. In
other words Judges make law in limited way.

Law making is an inherent and inevitable part of the judicial process. Thus
judicial decision making where by judges allow their personal view about public
policy among other factors to guide their decisions.

Case: Donogue Vs. Stevenson

The case was brought against the manufacturers. Until this case all cases of this nature were
rejected on the basis of Privity of Contract. But in this case lord Atkin looked at the
Philosophy of law, history of law and said manufacturers owes duty of care to the ultimate
consumer. The manufacturers and consumer are neighbors and there is no requirement of
contract between manufacturer and a consumer. Thus hereby judge created a new law.

Need of Judicial Process as an Authority

Judicial process should be followed by the courts because it marks the path of justice. It
provides the solution for future disputes and acts as useful guidance for the deciding judge in
disposing the cases. It is natural and indeed a necessary procedure of the court. Although this
process is followed by lower courts there arise many questions to be settled.

1. What is the meaning of Higher Courts?

2. Whether all the decisions of the higher court would be binding on lower courts?
3. How will we determine the mandatory position of the judgment for lower courts?
The Principles of Judicial Process Evolved

1. Precedent should be followed only so far as it marks the path of justice.

2. Reasons given by the court to decide the issue shall be treated as part of precedent.
3. If there are two conflicting judgments of the same bench of the S.C the lower court
shall follow the elaborate and accurate judgement.
4. Any decision given by the authoritative court without analysing the statutory
provision, it would not be treated as binding precedent because it is pre incuriam.
5. If the SC has expressed any opinion to interpret the statutory provision, this shall be
binding on the lower courts.
 6. Ratio decidendi of a judgement has to be found out only on reading entire judgment
and not reading a line from here and there of the judgment.
7. If the obiter dictum is reasonable and full of belief it should be followed by respect.
8. If the decision is given by the authoritative court without a speaking order it would
not be a binding precedent.
9. The SC of India is not bound to follow its previous decision.

Q.No.9. Solve any two of the following problems:

1. The property of a citizen of India seized by the police authorities of a State, on

suspicion of being stolen property, is lost while in police custody. The owner
claims damages from the State for the loss of his property and is rejected. What
remedies are available to the owner against the State?
Solution:

In the above mentioned facts the State is liable for the acts done by its servants. The
owner of the property can claim for restoration of property or he can claim compensation
for the loss caused by the negligence of such police.

Points for determination

 Article 300 of the Constitution provides that the Government of India may sue or be
sued by the name of the Union of India and the Government of a State may sue or be
sued by the name of the State and may, subject to any provisions which may be made
by Act of Parliament or of the Legislature of such State.
 The Constitution makes the Union and the State as a juristic person capable for
owning and acquiring property, making contracts, carrying on trade or business,
bringing and defending legal action just as private persons.
 There are two kinds of State Liability—a. Contractual Liability, Tortuous Liability
 The above said facts come under the tortuous liability of the State.
 The State is liable for the tortuous acts of its employees, acts done in the course of
employment.
 Prior to decision given in N.Nagendra Rao & Co. Vs. State of A.P. the State was
liable only when the acts done in the exercise of non-sovereign functions. But they
were not liable when the acts done in the exercise of sovereign functions. In the
leading case P. And O. Steam Navigation Co. Vs. Secretary of State they made a
clear distinction between sovereign and non-sovereign function, and held only for the
acts done in the exercise of non-sovereign functions the State is liable not for the
sovereign function.
 The above mentioned facts are similar to that of the facts of Kasturi Lal vs. State of
U.P. the facts of the case is as follows:
A person was taken into custody on suspicion of being in possession of stolen
property and taken to police station. His property including certain quantity of gold
and silver was taken out from him and kept in the Malkhana till the disposal of the
 case. The gold and silver was misappropriated by a police constable who fled to
Pakistan. The appellant sued the State of Uttar Pradesh for return of gold and silver,
and in the alternative claimed damages for loss caused by negligence of the Meerut
Police.
 In this case it was held by Supreme Court that the State was not liable. The tortuous
act of the police officers was committed by them in discharge of sovereign powers of
the state was therefore not liable for the damages caused to the appellant.
 They made a clear distinction between sovereign and non-sovereign functions:
1. If a tortuous act committed by a public servant gives rise to claim of damages, the
question to ask is: “was the tortuous act committed by a public servant in
discharge of statutory function which are referable to, and ultimately based on the
delegation of the sovereign powers of the State to such public servant.
2. If the answer is affirmative the action for damages will not lie.
3. On the other hand, if the tortuous act has been committed by a public servant in
the discharge of duties assigned to him not by virtue of delegation of any
sovereign powers, an action for damages would lie.
 The decision given in Kasturi Lal case does not holds good. It is outdated. The
Supreme Court has diluted the principle of sovereign immunity in the case,
N.Nagendra Rao & Co. Vs. State of A.P. In this case it was held that when due to
negligent act of the officers of the State a citizen suffers any damage the State will be
liable to pay compensation and the principle of sovereign immunity of State will not
absolve him from his liability. The court further held that in the modern concept of
sovereignty the doctrine of sovereign immunity stands diluted and the distinction
between sovereign function and non-sovereign functions no longer exists. The Court
noted the dissatisfactory condition of the law in this regard and suggested for enacting
appropriate legislation to remove the uncertainty in this area.

 Hence in the above mentioned facts the State is not immuned for the acts done by its
employees. The State is liable for the acts. The owner of such property is entitled to
get the property back or for such compensation for loss occurred due to negligent acts
of such authorities.

2. The President of India, by an order, after following the prescribed procedure,

removes certain judges of the High Court in a State on the ground that some of
their decisions are against the declared policy of the Government. Decide.
Solution:

The removal of judges of High Court on the ground that some of their decisions are
against the declared policy of the Government is considered as unconstitutional.
Points for determination:

 The High Court Judge shall hold the office until he attains the age of 62 years. A
Judge may however be removed from his office by the President in the same
manner and on same grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court.
 Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 the Parliament has passed Judges Inquiry Act, 1968
under which the procedure for investigation into misbehaviour or incapacity of a
Judge shall be done by a committee constituted by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha
or the chairman of the Rajya Sabha.
 The Committee shall consists of three members out of which one shall be chosen
from among the Chief Justice and other Judges of the Supreme Court, one shall be
chosen from among the Chief Justices of the High Court, one shall be a person
who in the opinion of the speakers or chairman, as the case may be, is a
distinguished Jurist, where such motion for the removal is brought by not less than
100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of Rajya Sabha.
 The committee shall not be constituted unless it has been admitted by the both
houses.
 The committee shall frame definite charges against the Judge on the basis of
which investigation is to proceed and the Judge shall be given a reasonable
opportunity of presenting his written statement and also hearing and cross-
examining witness.
 If the report submitted by the committee finds the Judge guilty, further
proceedings shall be taken in accordance with the provisions of clause(4) of
Article 124 or in accordance with that clause read with Article 218. The
misbehaviour or incapacity shall be deemed to have been proved and an address
for removal of the Judge shall be presented to the President by each house of
Parliament. The committee has been given the powers of the Civil Court for
certain purposes.
 A judge may be removed from his office by an order of the president only on
grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity not on any other basis.
 The order of the President can only be passed after it has been addressed to both
the houses of the Parliament. It has to be passed by 2/3 majority.
 In Case K.V. Ramaswamy vs. Union of India it was held that a Judge of the
Supreme Court and High Court can be prosecuted and convicted for criminal
misconduct. The expression “misbehaviour” in Article 124(5) includes criminal
misconduct defined in the Prevention of corruption Act.

 Hence in the above mentioned facts the removal of the judge is considered as
unconstitutional as the ground for removal is not a valid ground.
3. In State of ‘A’ the reservation of 25 seats were given for admission to M.B.B.S.
and B.D.S. course for students who are educated from classes I to VIII in
common rural schools. X wants to challenge this reservation in court of law.
Advice X.
Solution:

As per above mentioned case, the X can challenge such reservation made by the State
‘A’ on the ground of violation of Right to Equality (Article 14) and it is invalid on the
unreasonable classification.

Points for determination:

 Article 14 of the Indian Constitution declares that ‘the state shall not deny to any
person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory
of India’. It uses two expressions—
c. Equality before law, and
d. Equal protection of the law.
 Both these expressions aim at establishing what is called “equality of status” in
the preamble of the Constitution. While both expressions may seem to be
identical, they do not convey the same meaning. While ‘equality before the law’ is
somewhat negative concept implying the absence of any special privilege in
favour of individuals and the equal subjects of all classes to the ordinary law.
‘Equal protection of law’ is a more positive concept implying equality of
treatment in equal circumstances.
 The equal protection of laws does not mean that all laws are general in character.
It does not mean that the same laws should apply to all persons. It does not mean
that every law must have universal application for; all persons are not, by nature,
attainment or circumstances in the same position.
 The varying needs of different classes of persons often require separate treatment.
From the very nature of society there should be different laws in different places
and the Legislature controls the policy and enacts laws in the best interest of the
safety and security of the State. In fact, identical treatment in unequal
circumstances would amount to inequality. So, a reasonable classification is only
permitted but is necessary if society is to progress. Thus Article 14 forbids class-
legislation but it does not forbid reasonable classification.
 The classification, however, must not be “arbitrary, artificial or evasive” but must
be based on some real and substantial distinction bearing a just and reasonable
relation to the object sought to be achieved by the legislation.
 Article 14 applies where equals are treated differently without any reasonable
basis. But where equals and unequals are treated differently, Article 14 does not
apply. Class legislation is that which makes an improper discrimination by
conferring particular privileges upon a class of persons arbitrarily selected from
large number of persons, all of whom stand in the same relation to the privilege
granted that between whom and the persons not so favoured no reasonable
 distinction or substantial difference can be found justifying the inclusion of one
and the exclusion of the other from such privilege.

 Test for reasonable classification:

 The classification to be reasonable must fulfil the following conditions:
c. The classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which
distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of
the group; and
d. The differentia must have a rational relation to the object to be sought to be
achieved by the Act.
 The above mentioned facts are similar to the decided case, i.e., Suneel Jatley Vs.
State of Haryana. In this case, the reservation of 25 seats for admission to M.B.B.S.
and B.D.S. course for students who were educated from Classes I to VIII in common
rural schools was held to be violate of Art. 14 and invalid as classification between
the rural educated and urban educated students for this purpose was wholly arbitrary
and irrational having no nexus to the object sought to be achieved of providing extra
facilities to the students coming from rural schools to enter medical college.
 The Government prescribes same standard of education, equipment, grants and
facilities including the qualifications of the staff for being employed in urban and
rural schools imparting instructions from first to eight standard. Thus all the students
are similarly placed and the classification made is not constitutionally valid.

Thus, X can challenge the reservation made by the State ‘A’ on the ground that it
is violative of Article 14, where the classification made is unconstitutional.