CASE NO.: Writ Petition (civil) of PETITIONER: Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors RESPONDENT: State of Kerala and Anr DATE OF. The judgment in Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala, whose 40th Exactly forty years ago, on April 24, , Chief Justice Sikri and The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (Kesavananda . What the Supreme Court faced in was a struggle for supremacy.
|Published (Last):||2 March 2013|
|PDF File Size:||17.34 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.77 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Seervai and the learned Attorney General. Sen relied heavily on the speeches of Dr. It is not right to construe words in vacuum and then insert the meaning into an article. It may kesavznanda that there really is no expansion because every amendment may involve addition, variation or repeal of part of a provision. Both these cases were followed by another Constitution bench in U. Article enables the President to appoint a Commission to investigate the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes within the territory of India which shall present a report and make recommendations on steps that should be taken to remove difficulties and improve their condition.
Lake 99 C. But the court did not have that many judges to devote the considerable time the hearings would need, so new appointments had to be made. The above proceedings bjarati that the minorities were particularly concerned with the fundamental rights which were the subject-matter of discussion by the Fundamental Rights Committee.
Such a Constitution can, indeed, be altered or amended by the legislature, if the regulating instrument so provides that if the terms of those provisions are compiled with and the alteration or amendment may include the change or abolition of those very provisions. Unfortunately we have no properly constituted Legislatures in the rest of the States apart from Mysore, Saurashtra and Travancore and Cochin Union nor will it be possible to have Legislatures constituted 1793 them before the Constitution of India emerges in its final form.
It was urged before the Court that Sankari Prasad’s  S. Seervai relied on the portion within brackets of the following passage at pp. He is the present head and guru of Sri Edneer Mutt which belongs to the parampara of Sri Thotakacharya, one of the first four disciples of Sri Adi Shankaracharya and follows Smartha Bhagawatha tradition of Advaitha Pantha which has more than vase of history of religion, culture, art, music and social service.
How 40 years ago, this day, court saved the country
But what is remarkable is that when we come to Part VI of the Constitution, which deals with the “States”, the only provision which is mentioned in the proviso to Article is Article which deals with the extent of executive power of States. Held that the Constitution of India which is essentially a social rather than a political document, is founded on a social philosophy and as such has two main features basic and circumstantial.
This Preamble, and indeed the Constitution, was drafted in the light and direction of the Objective Resolutions adopted on January 22,which runs as follows: All the six writ petitions involve common questions as to the validity of the Twenty- fourth, Twenty-fifth and Twenty-ninth Amendments of the Constitution.
These principles were commonly termed as Basic Structure. The members of the panel are paid remuneration Section To hold this would mean prima facie that the most solemn parts of our Constitution stand on the same footing as any other provision and even on a less firm ground than one on which the articles mentioned in the proviso stand.
I have mentioned them only to give another example. It may be noted that what was implied regarding carrying on trade was made an express provision in the Constitution by the Constitution Seventh Amendment Act,when a new Article was substituted. The Sub-Committee on Minorities met later the same day.
The guarantee of fundamental rights extends to numerous rights and it could not have been intended that all of them would remain completely unalterable even if Article 1.
Story says that Clause 18 imports no ,esavananda than would remit from necessary implication see pp. One must pause and ask kesavanand question as to why did the Constituent. He was of the view that even though the relevant provisions of Part III can be justly described as the very foundation and the cornerstone of the democratic way of life ushered kesavvananda this country by the Constitution, it cannot be iesavananda that the fundamental rights guaranteed to the citizens are eternal and inviolate in the sense that they can never be abridged or amended.
It must be borne in mind that these conclusions were given in the light of the Constitution as it stood then i. The true position is that every provision of the Constitution can be amended provided the basic foundation and structure of the Constitution remains the same.
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law. Would this not suggest kesavanands the framers of the Constitution attached special significance to it?
Inthe Supreme Court took an extreme view, in the Golak Nath case, that Parliament could not amend or alter any fundamental right. This Court has in numerous decisions implied similar powers. According to Gajendragadkar, C. This section is empty.
The case that saved Indian democracy
In the Preamble to the International Covenant on Economic and Social and Cultural Rightsinalienability of rights is indicated in the first Para as follows: Before proceeding with the main task, it is necessary to ask: United States 77 L. The principal bharsti, however, is, as stated above, that we look upon this Constituent Assembly as a sovereign body which can decide as it chooses in regard to any matter before it and can give effect to its decisions.
It will be noticed that Article is contained in a separate part and the heading is “Amendment of the Constitution”, but the marginal note reads “Procedure for amendment of the Constitution”.
Article 24 provides that “no child below the age of fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment. There are 11 separate judgements of each judge, however the summarized form of the same is- Writ Petition No.
This restriction exists independently of the question whether the legislature is sovereign, as is the legislature of Ceylon, or whether the Constitution is “uncontrolled,” as the Board kesavanahda the Constitution of Queensland to be.
The case that saved Indian democracy – The Hindu
Ambedkar but he made it clear at p. He has also urged that the Preamble came into force on November 26, alongwith Articles 5, 6, 7 etc. Related Topics Comment judiciary system of justice. Article contains provisions in case of kesaavananda of Constitutional machinery in a State. Retrieved 12 January In a major embarrassment to Ray, it was revealed that no one had filed a review petition.