Simranjeet Singh Sidhu

The makers of the Constitution imposed a ban by Article () upon the ‘State’ passing a law in contravention of the rights conferred by Part III. Social justice will determine the nature of the individual right and also the restriction on such right. The Court will certainly give due weight to legislative judgment. A Constitution which is unchanging and static, it does not matter how good it is, how perfect it is, is a Constitution that has past its use. , as it existed in , when the book was written.

Further the learned Advocate Simranjeet General is not correct in his assumption that the function of the members belonging to the ruling party is to blindly support a measure sponsored by the executive. I have already dealt with the question as to whether the power to amend the Constitution would include within itself the power to change the basic structure or framework of the Constitution. These words have habitually been construed in their fullest scope. (This opinion however was tentative and not final).

That ratio requires that the validity of each new constitutional amendment must be judged on its own merits. Mill, much remains to be said. In a democracy the determination of policies to be pursued can only be determined by a majority vote cast at election and then by a majority of the elected representatives in the legislature. Article A was held to be constitutionally valid by this Court. The Attorney General’s argument was that, short of creating such a vacuum, the power is wide enough to cover a replacement of the present Constitution by another.

The Eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. Since both an amendment of the Constitution and an ordinary law derive their validity from the Constitution, the criterion that an ordinary Simranjeet Law Associates can be tested for its validity on the touchstone of the Constitution must equally apply to an amendment of the Constitution. What are essential features and non essential features of the Constitution ? , Lord Pearson declined to read the words of Section () of the Ceylon Constitution as entitling the Parliament to pass legislation which usurped the judicial power of the judicature by passing an Act of Attainder against some persons or instructing a judge to bring in a verdict of guilty against someone who is being tried-if in law such usurpation would otherwise be contrary to the Constitution.

There is no limitation imposed upon or deception made to the amendments which can be made. Simranjeet Singh Sidhu Further, although because of the federal character of the State, the Canadian Constitution cannot be called flexible, it is probably the least rigid of any in the modern federal states (see Modern Political Constitutions by C. Merillat, “The Sound Proof Room : A Matter of Interpretation” () , Journal of the Indian Law Institute, p. However, if the meaning I have suggested is accepted a social and economic revolution can gradually take place while preserving the freedom and dignity of every citizen.

It would be absurd to think that there can be two bodies for doing the same thing under the Constitution. The principle underlying the judgment of the majority was extended to the protection of the right to property and it was held that Article ()(f) and Article () were mutually exclusive in their operation. His contention was that our democracy is worked on the basis of party system. In other words, he must, by use of his reason, ascertain and follow the course which reason directs.

It cannot confer any power per se; it can never amount, by implication, to an enlargement of any power expressly given. that the preamble of Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu a statute is a key to open the mind of the makers as to the mischiefs, which are to be remedied, and the objects, which are to be accomplished by the provisions of the statute. Social justice means various concepts which are evolved in the Directive Principles of the State. According to him, these observations were obiter dicta, but even if they are treated as considered obiter dicta, they add nothing to the principles governing delegated legislation, for this passage merely repeats what had been laid down as far back as in The Queen v.

If that word has a limited meaning, which is the case of the petitioner, it is contended that that power of amendment could not be enlarged by the use of the words “amend by way of addition, variation and repeal”. Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List. – and Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad Etc. The building of a welfare State, the learned Judges said, is the ultimate goal of every Government but that does not mean that in order to build a welfare state, human freedoms have to suffer a total destruction.

(i) to improve or better; to remove an error, the question of improvement being considered from the standpoint of the basic philosophy underlying the Constitution but subject to its essential features. Now it is significant that most of the justices including the Chief Justice who delivered judgments dealt only with the questions which had nothing to do with the meaning of the word “amendment”. And he further points out that in French Constitutional Law the expression pouvoir constituant is often used to describe the ‘amending authority’ as well as the constituent power, but the expression constituent power used by him is not identical with the pouvoir constituant of the French Constitutional Law See Carl J.

If the question of fixation of “amount” under Article () is considered as the exclusive function of the executive, then, not only the judicial review will be taken away, even the legislature will not have the opportunity of examining the correctness or appropriateness of the “amount” fixed. This means that by action of two-third of both Houses of Congress and of the legislatures in three-fourth of the States, all the powers of the national, government could be surrendered to the State and all the reserved powers of the States could be transferred to the Federal Government See Burdick, “The Law of the American Constitution”, pp.

This enforcement of individual fundamental rights naturally disregarded the injury to the public good caused by dilatory litigation which can hold up large schemes of necessary social legislation affecting a large number of people. Few Constitutiontly issues can be presented in black and white terms. It is a historical fact which cannot be disputed that Pakistan committed aggression against India on rd December, and a grave threat to the security of India arose on account of this external aggression.

In this connection we find that this Court held in some cases that Articles ()(f) and () were exclusive. Clause (s) of Article requires an amendment to be ratified by not less than half the number of States. Although prima facie it would appear that the Constitution makers did not employ the composite expression in Article for certain reasons and even rejected Mr. No question was raised about the right of religion protected by Sections () and () of the Ceylon Constitution.

The effect of the amendment is that the law now need not provide for giving ‘compensation’ in the sense of equivalent in value or just equivalent of the value of the property acquired and that the whole or part of the amount may be paid otherwise than in cash. All the functionaries, be they legislators, members of the executive or the judiciary take oath of allegiance to the Constitution and derive their authority and jurisdiction from its provisions.

If this is the true position, it is, in our opinion, a negation of parliamentary democracy. It is of the utmost importance that people should realise that this great Constitution of ours, over which we laboured for so long, is not a final and rigid thing, which must either be accepted or broken. It is difficult to accept the view expressed by Subba Rao C. Nor is it necessary that Article C should commence with the words “Notwithstanding anything contained in Article “.

held Article A to be valid on the principle of stare decisis. It was held that “the words “incite” and “encourage” are wide enough to include incitement and encouragement by words and speeches and also by acts and the words used in the section are so wide and vague that the clause must be held to be void in its entirety.