Constitution Law 1

Question 1

Preamble 3 cases

Answer 1

1. Berubari union case - not part, not source of substantive power
2. KBC - part, light of grand and noble visions expressed in preamble
3. Charan lal sahu vs uoi- valuable aid in the construction of provisions of constn, same position as other provisions

Question 2

Intro and Concl preamble

Answer 2

Alladi krishnaswamy

Nani palkhivala- preamble is the identity card of constn.

Preamble expressss what we had thought and dreamt for so long

Question 3

Secularism is not defined in constn. But from various judgement

Answer 3

Like KBC and bommai

1. Religious tolerance and mutual fraternity
2. State doesn’t discriminate
3. States take positive step to ensure religious tolerance and social wellbeing, democratic values
4. Secular activities

Question 4

Famous case of secularism

Answer 4

Aruna roy vs uoi

1. Essence - mutual tolerance and fraternity
2. Religious pluralism is at the base of indian secularism
3. Religion major source of value generation

Question 5

Define constitutionalism

Answer 5

Political philosophy of limited govt. No uncontrolled or arbitary power in the hands of legislature or executive.

Question 6

How our constn ensures constitutionalism

Answer 6

1. Powers prescribed: 72,161- power to grant pardon
2. Procedure - 61
3. Limitations- 13
4. Held accountable - 75, 164

Question 7

Negative constitutionalism article

Answer 7

14
15
19
22
21
32
226

Question 8

Positive constitutionalism?

Answer 8

Set of political values and aspirations that reflect the welfare state concept.
Ensure social well-being and common good by placing checks and balance

16
39, 41( unemployment, oldage, sickness

Question 9

Concl of constitutionalism

Answer 9

Am bedkhar in his last constituent assembly speech - however good a Constitution may be, it is sure to turn out bad because those who are called to work it, happen to be a bad lot.

Question 10

Define constitutional conventions

Answer 10

Rules of political practice which are regarded as binding by those whom they apply.

Grow out of practice and precedents.
Enforce - Political will/ public opinion

Question 11

What are the fedral features of our constn

Answer 11

1. Legislative - 368 and 007
2. Independent judiciary
3. Written constn and it’s associated supremacy
4. Exec - large autonomy under ordinary times

Question 12

What are unitary features of constn

Answer 12

1. Art 1 - destructible states
2. Leg- 249,250, 252,253
   Repugnant in concurrent -254
   . Residuary -248
3. financial -360, 293(3)
4. executive -200, ais

Question 13

Trace the evolution of definition of state under article 12

Answer 13

1. very narrow- ejusdem generis
2. sukhdev vs bhagatram- ongc, lic
3. rd shetty vs aai, ajay hasia -instrumentality or functional test
4. pradeep kumar biswas vs iicb- financial and administrative dominace coupled with functionality
5. janet jayapul vs srm- pvt university was held to be an instrument of state because of it’s public function ( imparting education) and since it’s function are governed by UGC ( certain degree of govt control)
6. Kishor madhukhar vs automative research association ( 2022) – ara was not FOA dominated by govt and enjoyed substantive autonomy. Hence neither an agency nor an instrumentality of the govt

Question 14

Give the agency test as per ajay hasia case

Answer 14

1. capital share
2. Financial aid
3. Monopoly statute
4. deep control
5. Functions of public importance

Question 15

Case laws for doctrine of severability-art 13.?? What is the test applied to see if DOS can be applied

Answer 15

1. Rmdc vs uoi - prize competition act valid wrt retriction of gambling but not other skill based competition
2. Uoi vs rajendra shah - multistate cooperatives valid
3. Valid part - Severable, workable, object defunct
4. Would leg enact if severable part removed
5. Legislative intent

Question 16

Provisions of the constn wrt judicial review

Answer 16

Art 13
Art 32,226
Art 245- power of parl and Sl are subject to the provisions of the constn

Question 17

Explain equality before law and equal protection of law under art 14

Answer 17

1. Equality before law :-
   Conferring privilege, equal society through machinery of law, diceys rule of law- no one is above law
2. Equal protection of law- like alike unlike unlike, 14th amendment of USA

Only when these 2- equality of status and opportunity

Question 18

Test of reasonable classification under art 14 evolutions

Answer 18

1. Anwar ali sarkar case - twin test of intelligible difference and rational nexus

Budhan cahudhary vs state - classification amy be founded on different bases namely geograhical, occupation etc.

2. Ep royappa case - justice PN BAGWATI pronounced a new concept of equality. ARBITARINES is the antithesis of equality. This was applied in the famous AIRHOSTESS CASE- retire on 1st pregnancy. Not applicable to male-
3. Maneka Gandhi - 14,19, 21
4. DS NAKARA Vs UOI- prefixed with reasonable- element of equality and non arbitariness

Question 19

Case law for a single individual may constitute a class under art 14

Answer 19

Chiranjit lal chaudhary vs uoi
Govt taking over sholapur

Reasonable classification- if some special circumstances applicable to a single person. Mismanagement- affecting prod of essential goods and serious unemployment issues

Question 20

Equality is a positive concept. Cannot be used to perpetuate fraud

Answer 20

Gurusharan singh case

Municipal comm wrong order cannot be perpetuated with the help of art 14. Just bcoz wrong order was earlier passed in the favor of some.

Lokesh ahirwar vs state (2022) - while dismissing a petition filed by a teacher seeking study leave at par with
A. article 14 is not meant to perpetuate illegality or fraud.
B. Equality cannot be claimed in illegality.

Question 21

Equal pay for equal work under art 14

Answer 21

State of Punjab vs jagjit singh

Daily workers, casual, contact worker- equal pay as permanent employee doing the same work

Question 22

No judicial review of economic policy of govt

Answer 22

Balco employees union vs uoi - contrary to the legal and social interest of employees

1. Global tender + above reserve price , ,, therefore not arbitary
2. Fix of reserve price is prerogative of govt as long as non arbitary methodology used
3. Sale of public asset is reasonable
4. Divestment is valid policy unless there is breach of law

Question 23

Art 15(3)

Answer 23

State can make special provision for women and children
Ex: educational institutions for women

Gaurav jain vs UOI - Special schemes for children of sex workers

Question 24

Art 15(4) . Key elements discuss

Answer 24

State can make special provisions for advancement of SEBC, SC/ST
Not right but discretion of the state

Sc st - 366

Who are SEBC?
balaji vs state of mysore

Limitations under 15(4)

1. Backward vs more backward- indra swahney case
2. Super specialty courses in medical and engineering - dr preeti sagar vs state
3. Obc reservation in HEI (93 aa) - allowed - ASHOK KUMAR THAKUR vs UOI

Question 25

Who are the SEBC according to balaji vs state of mysore

Answer 25

1. Must be backward both social and educational. Not e Or s
2. Caste not sole determinant
3. Poverty, place of habitation and ones occupation
4. Reservation under 15(4) shouldn’t nullify equality of 15(1)

Question 26

Explain 16(4)

Answer 26

Reservation of appointment in public offices in favor of backward classes of citizens
Indra swahney
1. 16(4) is not an exception but an illustration of the classification inherent in 16(1)
2. Caste not sole criteria
3. Creamy layer obc
4. 50% celing

Article 335

The rationale for the same can be seen in RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA vs UOI
correct societal attitude and historical neglect . Integrate, “ Agents of their own destiny “

In BK PAVITRA vs UOI - while countering the argument that reservation would impact efficiency of administration, court called it “ stereotypical assumption “. Efficiency of administration must be defined in an inclusive sense

In a recent case of AHMEDABAD MAHANAGAR PALIKA vs Kamgar union –> validity of a scheme whereby legal heirs of all retiring employees being given compassionate appointment– court struck down the scheme saying it lead to crusading and sacrifice of merit and is against constn spirit of 14, 15 and 16.

Jagdish negi case - backwardness not static. State should review from time to time

Question 27

Case for single post reservation

Answer 27

PGIMER vs faculty association - only one post then like 100% reservation.

Chebrolu Leela Prasad case - 100% reservation for st teachers

Question 28

Is 16(4) an exception or an expression of 16(1)

Answer 28

1. Balaji case - exception
2. State of Kerala vs NM Thomas - not exception. But facet of doc of equality under art 14
3. Indra swahney- not exception. Independent clause
4. Rajiv kumar gupta - emphatic expression.
5. BK pavitra vs UOI- it’s an enunciation of the substantive equality put forth in 16(1)

Exception - facet- expression- enunciation

Question 29

Reservation in promotion cases

Answer 29

1. Indra swahney- no
2. 77th, 85th - consequential seniority
3. M nagaraj case - quantifiable data on - backwardness, inadequacy of representation, overall efficiency
4. Jarnail singh vs uoi- no need of quantifiable data, historic disadvantage of untouchable – so no question of backwardness
5. Bk pavitra vs uoi - not at odds with meritocracy, stereotypical assumption

Question 30

Right to commercial advertisement under article 19

Answer 30

1. Tata press vs MTNL - right to commercial ad
2. Hamdard dawakhana vs uoi - no. Because element of trade and commerce. Not to propogate any idea - social, economic or political
3. Sakal vs benet coleman

Question 31

Freedom of press

Answer 31

Not explicit like 1st amendment of US Constitution

1. Right to circulation is as essential as freedom of publication ( ramesh thappar case)
2. Fix no. Of pages and area of ad ( bennet coleman case)
3. Criticise ( subject to 19(2) )
4. Freedom to receive information ( indian express vs uoi)
5. Against pre censorship (brij bhushan case)
6. Right to choose editorial board free from govt restrictions
7. Freedom to report court proceedings – sahara real estate vs SEBI
8. Freedom to conduct interviews ( state vs charulata and prabhadutt vs uoi)
   3 caveats –> consent, stop, can’t force to answer quo.

Realising the importance of this rt supreme court has defined it as an INALIENABLE ADJUNCT to article 21 without which one cannot have a quality of life. By doing to SC has elevated the position of 19(1) (a) and the rt of press

Question 32

What are the 2 case laws related to restrictions under 19(2)

Answer 32

1. Rangarajan vs p jagjivan ram - far fetched, proximate and direct nexus with expression
2. Shreya singhal vs uoi - warned against insidious form of censorship which impairs core value of 19(1) (a)

Question 33

3 important cases of right to form associations under art 19(1) (c)

Answer 33

1. State of madras vs VG row - a law which empowered the govt to declare an association invalid was held invalid
2. Raghubar dayal case - recognition of association not FR
3. . Periyar self respect propaganda inst vs state- rt to hold office in an association not part of FR
4. AT the same time no one can be forced to be a member of any association

Question 34

2 cases under freedom to carry on trade and commerce

Answer 34

1. Mcdowell case- state can impose restrictions on liquor trade
2. Bombay hawkers union case - no absolute right for hawkers on public road. But licensed sone should be given

Question 35

What are the headings of prior to maneka Gandhi and after maneka Gandhi table

Answer 35

1. Protection under art 21 ( executive or legislative action )
2. Personal liberty -
3. Interrelation between 14, 19, 21-
4. Due process of law
5. ‘Law’ in art 21 - natural justice

Mithu singh vs state of Punjab - we have gone beyond procedural fairness and have discussed fairness of law.

Question 36

Wht did SC say about procedure established by law in maneka Gandhi

Answer 36

It is not enough to have mere prescription of some kind of procedure to adhere to art 21. The procedure must be just and fair and not arbitrary, fanciful.
The procedure must embody the principle of nj

Art 14 and 19 takes care of the substantive aspects, art 21- procedural aspect

Question 37

Safeguards in Constitution wrt preventive detention

Answer 37

1. 22(4) - if greater than 3 mnths advisory panel
2. 22(5) - grounds of arrest, representation
3. Ak roy vs uoi - 14,19, 21
4. 32,226 - habeas corpus

Question 38

Rights given to a person under preventive detention through various judgements

Answer 38

1. Prem narayanan vs uoi - personal freedom cannot be infringed upon in an easy going way
2. Keep seperated from convicts
3. No treatment of punitive character ( ak roy)
4. Socialise and interview with friends ( francis coralie case)
5. To write and publish a book ( prabhakar vs state

Question 39

2 cases where compensation was given under art 21

Answer 39

1. Bhim singh vs uoi - mla was detained

2. Sube singh case - custodial torture

Question 40

Is rendering teachers for educational survey, family planning, preparation of voters list etc against art 23 (traffic, beggar, forced labor)

Answer 40

No.. Bcoz it’s for public purpose (art 23(2))

DN GUPTA vs STATE OF MP

Question 41

Rights provided under ART 26

Answer 41

1. Maintain and establish
2. Manage religious affairs
3. Movable and immovable property
4. Administer such

Nelson vs kalyanam pastorate - no right to mismanagement

Question 42

Relationship between art 29 and art 30

Answer 42

1. 29(1) and 30(1) - distinct matter. May complement each other in particular matter ( st xaviers college case)
2. 29(2) and 30(1)
   A. Some cases held thera minority institutions not receiving aid from govt out of purview of 29(2)
   B. St stephens college case - melting pot

Question 43

Which case held art 32 part of basic structure

Answer 43

Fertilizer corporation kamgar vs UOI

Question 44

Types of tools under art 32

Answer 44

Habeas corpus
Mandamus
Prohibition
Ceritori 
Quo warranto

Question 45

Case for protection against misuse of PIL

Answer 45

Sp gupta vs UOI

1. Personal grievances
2. Private profit
3. Political considerations

Procedural safeguard have been laid to prevent misuse ( gutruvayoor management commitee vs CK Rajan )
1. Mention the FR which is violated
2 proscribed letter directly written to judges
3. Pil cell
4. Before admitting application of pil court should take into consideration- credentials of the applicant, prima facile correctness of info, info shouldn’t be vague
5. Court should see that justifiable executive actions are not assailed for oblique motives

Question 46

Intro and conclusion of pil

Answer 46

Pudr vs uoi - collaborative effort of judiciary, state and petitioner

Conclusion - Bhagwati J. , hailed as champion of PIL- PIL IS THE STRATEGIC ARM OF LEGAL AID

Question 47

Features of PIL

Answer 47

1. No limits and boundaries- from env protection to wage for labourer
2. Benifit of group. Ganga- COVID
3. Locus standi relaxed - any public spirited person
4. Relaxed procedure.- HUSSAINARA KHATOON CASE - INDIAN Express news item
   4 . 226/32
5. Art 12- against state

Question 48

Demerits of pil

Answer 48

1. Tools of harrassment
2. Frivolous - calcutta HC dismisses PIL against KOFEE WITH KARAN filed with the object to “ Gain publicity “
3. Private grievances in the garb - fear of corporate vendetta- allocation of 4G spectrum
4. Ignoring vital PIL- central vista project - labelled motivated

Question 49

Structure for legal aid questions

Answer 49

1. 39a, 14, 22(1)
2. Bhagwati committee, krishna iyer committe, several cases like HUSSAINARA KHATOON
3. legal services authority act 1987
   Free civil and criminal, certain categories- women, children , victims of disaster etc
4. Statutory status to lol adalat under LSAA
   civil and compundable criminal, pending or pre litigation, final no appeal
5. Permanent lok adalat for disputes related to public utility service
6. Reality - leagal awareness ( bandhua mukhti)), volunteers, payment, implementation of law
7. Wf - uk system of solicitors, community paralegals, UNODC- Liberia, university based clinical legal aid providers

Question 50

Case laws of FR vs DPSP

Answer 50

1. Chambakam dorairajan vs state - dpsp runs subsidiary
2. Gokalnath vs state - FRs are sacrosanct
3. 24th- 13(4) - FR can be amended by CAA
4. 25th- 31C (1) - 39 b and c supremacy over 14,19,31
   31 C (2) - no judicial review
5. KBC - 31 c (1) valid, but not the other
6. 42nd CAA- All dpsp would have primacy over 14,19,31
7. Minerva mills case - back to pre 42 nd aa. Balance of harmony of fr and dpsp

Question 51

Most important articles wrt president

Answer 51

52- president is the head of the state
53- executive power of the Union is vested in the prez
74- com to aid and advise the president and prez shall act in accordance with such advice

Question 52

Why prez made a mere constitutional head

Answer 52

Art 75(3) - com is answerable to the LS. 
Meaningless without giving the final authority to decide the affairs of the state

RAM JAWAYA KAPOOR - formal, constitutional head. Must act in accordance

SHAMSHER SINGH CASE- No need for the president to be personally satisfied to exercise advice of the council

Question 53

Is the president bound by advise of com

Answer 53

1. Art 74- shall bound
2. Pre 42nd - nothing specific
3. 42nd - no reconsideration
4. 44th - can send back for reconsideration once

Question 54

Can advise given by COM be questioned in court

Answer 54

SP gupta vs president of india - advice can’t be questioned. But materials scrutinized

• court will not go into correctness or adequacy of the material
• Only concerned with validity of the order and not what happened in inner council

Art 74(2) – protects the secrecy. But not the acts of the prez. Cannot override the basic provisions of JR, Com should justify his acts

Question 55

COM is individually and collectively responsible

Answer 55

Collective

1. Grow and sink
2. Even in case of disagreemt
3. 75(3)
4. 78(c) - decision by min to be considered by COM

individual

1. Art 77(3) - rules for allocation
2. Art 75(2) - min hold office during pleasure of prez

Jda vs daulatmal- each minister individually and collectively responsible.

Question 56

Discretionary power of governor - 2 articles and give some situations where he can use his discretion

Answer 56

1. Art 163(1) - bound by aid and advise unless the situation where constn requires him to use his discretion
2. Art 163(2) - the decision of the governor whether a matter falls within his discretion shall be final
3. 200
4. 356
5. Administrator of adjoining territory
6. Appoint CM
7. Dossolve com

Question 57

Some way forward for reducing the dicretionary issues of the governor

Answer 57

1. Punchi comm- discretionary power to be narrowly construed, time limit to assent for bill Or reserve for president
2. Appointment - isc Or seperate panel
3. Strengthen fedralism- isc, rs

Question 58

3 articles and 2 cases for removal of governor

Answer 58

156(1) - pleasure of president
156(2) - resign
156(3) - subject to 156(1) - 5 years

1. Surya narain vs UOI ( No security, pp nit justiciable, not regulated by A 311)
2. BP singhal vs UOI

Question 59

What we’re the safeguards given to the removal of governor under BP SINGHAL VS UOI

Answer 59

1. Constant threat of removal - subservient
2. Limited JR- arbitary, malafide, capracious
3. Cannot be removed - out of sync with ideology of CG or CG has lost confidence
4. English doctrine of pleasure w/o limitation not applicable in indian case .
   Nothing like unfettered discretion or unaccountable action

Question 60

3 cases to write for ordinance making power

Answer 60

1. RC Cooper ( satisfied - immediate action, satisfaction is justiciable on grounds of malafide)
2. RK Garg vs UOI
3. Dc wadhwa case - 256 ordinance - 13 years
   ( successive repromulgation is violation of constn, usurping the power of leg, subverting the Democratic process, fraud on constn, there must not be an ordinace raj in the country).

Question 61

5 safe guards wrt OMP under RK GARG vs UOI

Answer 61

1. Not a parallel power
2. Only when both house not in session
3. Time limit - 6 weeks, parl disapprpves before that
4. Omp is coextensive with law making power of parl - only on those matters
5. Same limitations- can’t abrogate fr

Not undemocratic - com answerable

Question 62

Intro for pardoning power of prez

Answer 62

Sec 72 - pardon, reprieve, despite, commutation, or remission of punishment under - UNION LAW, court martial, death sentence

161- state law. But not pardon death sentence or court martial

Question 63

3 cases for nature of parsoning power

Answer 63

1. Kehar singh vs uoi (not a right, examine evidence afresh and come to a different conclusion, SC need not lay down guidelines as it’s a very wide power)
2. State of haryana vs jagdish ( never intented to be used by executive as an unbridled power of repieve, though it might mitigate the sentence if punishment it doesn’t wipe out conviction)
3. Devendrapal singh case ( consider all the relevant facts considered by the court, nature of crime, impact on society, incriminating and extenuating circumstances) . Not arbitarily Or unreasonably

Question 64

Judicial review of pardoning power 2 cases

Answer 64

1. Epuru sudhakar case - caste or political reasons
   JR - Non application of mind, malafide, arbitary, extraneous considerations
2. Satpal vs state of haryana
   Court invalidated remission - wrong and incomplete facts
   JR ( if pp w/o consulting com, g transgressed his jurisdiction, mind, malafide, extraneous)

Question 65

3 cases wrt delay in disposal of mercy petitions

Answer 65

1. Triveniben vs state of guj ( art 21- any procedure that takes away life must be reasonable and fair, procedural fairness at every stage until last breath, inordinate delay = avoidable mental agony and suffering)
2. Devinder pal singh - in case of conviction under anti terror law- long delay not ground for commutation of death sentence
3. Shatrughnan singh chauhan case - crime irrelevant, suffering that comes with anticioating death everyday = torture. Death sentence= life imprisonment

Devander pal singh case was held per incuriam

4. Ag periarivalan case - cabinets decision to commute death sentence is binding on governor under 161. No need to reserve for presidents consideration.

Question 66

3 ingredients of art 20

Answer 66

20(1) - no ex post facto law
20(2) - no double jeopardy
20(3) - right against self incrimination

Question 67

Art 20(1) - no ex post facto law

Answer 67

1. Law declaring offence subsequent to commission of act
2. Law enhancing penalty

Ex: dowry prohibition act 20/5/1961

3. Beneficial ex post facto law- operates to modify the rigour of the previous law ( rattan lal vs state of Punjab)
4. Procedure can be expost facto
5. Imposing civil liablity retrospectively not barred

Question 68

Art 20(2) - no double jeopardy

Answer 68

Nemo debet vix vexari

1. 3 conditions under THOMAS DAS vs state - prosecution, punished, same offence
2. Prosecution - sea customers authority, fera
   Proceedings is not prosecution ( maqbool hussain case)
3. Punished. So appeal against aquittal by prosecution is valid
4. Same offence.- sea customs act, later conspiracy to commit the act under ipc ( leo frey case)

Question 69

Art 20(3) - rt against self incrimination

Answer 69

1. Indian criminal jurisprudence
2. Accused
3. Against compulsion to be witness
4. Against compulsion to give evidence against himself
5. Involuntary administration of narco analysis ( selvi vs state)

Question 70

Freedom of trade and commerce

Answer 70

1. Art 301 freedom of TCI
2. Art 302- can regulate in public interest
   Surajmal roopchand - movt of grains
3. 303- one state in a more preferable position, can if scarcity of goods in one part
4. 304- tax on imported, if alike goods are taxed in state
   State of mp vs bhilalbhai - tobacco

Principles of 301 in ATIBARI TEA COMPANY Vs STATE OF ASSAM

• Assurance of freedom of inter and intra state
• TCI have widest connotation
• laws inteded to facilitate trade like compensatory tax are outside scope of 301

Question 71

Socialism in indian preamble

Answer 71

1. Added in 42nd AA
2. DS NAKARA VS UOI
   a. Obj of adding socialist - to make DPSPs more comprehensive and assertive
   b. Purpose is to eliminate ineq of income and status + provide decent standard of living + provide security from cradle to grave ie. establishment of welfare state.
   c. Indian socialism is a blend of marxian and gandhian socialism, with heavy leaning towards gandhian
3. Indian socialism doesn’t mean total exclusion of private enterprise but end poverty, ignorance, disease and inequality of opportunity.
4. The idea of Indian socialism can be seen in progressive policies like
   a. Devp of efficient PSUs and tie ups with private sector simultaneously
   b. LPG reforms, state taking the role of regulator and facilitator for private business
   c. Social Security measures and institutionalization of grievance redressal.

These measures have enmeshed the ideas of competitive devp and downward filtration principles of capitalism in constitutional vision of ensuring justice and substantive equality.

4. In SAMATHA vs state – sc observed that model of Indian socialism envisages indv devp and social devp as complementary to each other and can go hand in hand.
5. Thus, Indian approach to socialism ensures that individual and social devp have a parallel and converginv role in acheiving constn goal of an egalitarian social order.

Question 72

Frame work of constn convention

Answer 72

1. Intro
2. Need
   A. Prevent rigidness- idealistic perfection
   B. Constitutional silence - every possible situation, deliberate silences, indispensable
3. Dicey- conventiins are means whereby discretionary authority of govt organ is regulated.
4. Supreme court advocates on record vs UOI — CONVENTIONS once applied will become part of the constitutional law of land

Question 73

Indian fedralism unique

Answer 73

KC wheare - the framers of the constn wanted to avoid difficulties faced by other fedral constn of USA, Canada, auz etc and therefore incorporated certain unique features in the working of constn.

1. Union instead of fedration - not a result of agreement, no freedom time secede.
2. Unlike American fedralism in tight mould, Indian fed- sui generis - unitary as well as fedral according to time and circumstances. Ex: war
3. India has dual polity but single citizenship. America - dual. To avoid discrimination by states and ensure that citizens have same political and civil rights across the country.
4. Each state of USA is free to draft it’s own constn covering matters within its competence. India - constn is a single frame which applies to center as well as states from which neither can get out and within which each must work.
5. States temporary identity within article 3. But in other systems, specifically USA - states are independent and indestructible.
6. Integrated and independent judiciary

Thus in practice Indian constn is quasi fedral in nature and not strictly fedral. This makes Indian fedration a union or a composite of novel types in the word of dd basu

Question 74

Indian cooperative fedralism

Answer 74

1. CF involves center and state cooperating with each other for overall devp of the nation
2. Participation of states in creation and implementation of national policies
3. In state of Raj vs uoi- SC quoted granville Austin wherein it was said “ Indian fedration is an example of cooperative fedralism. India has created a strong central govt, it has not made the state govt weak”
4. Examples -
   a. Gst council ( 246A, 279A)
   b. Interstate council ( art 263 )
   c. Niti ayog
   d. Ndma and sdma during covid
   e. 258, 258A– mutual delegation of exec power

Question 75

Equality is the antithesis of arbitariness.

Answer 75

1. In Ep royappa case justice PN BAGWATI pronounced a new concept of equality…
2. Arbitariness can said to be the whims and aspirations of an absolute monarch
3. Bachan singh vs state - rule of law excludes arbitariness. It’s postulate is intelligent w/o passion, reason freed from desire
4. Test applied in several case - AIRHOSTESS CASE, MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION CASE (2021) - Provision of keeping age requirement to 50 years for appointment to tribunals was held violative of art 14 as it was arbitary.
5. Unlike nexus test +— no particular formula. Developed from time to time. Due to uncertainty criticized by several jurists including HM Seervai.

Question 76

Formal vs substantive equality

Answer 76

Formal - belief that for fairness people must be treated equally all the time.

Substantial equality– not simply equal treatment of law but deals with actual impact of law.

Recognizes that treating unequals as equals only serve to widen the disparity between 2 contesting categories.

Anwar ali sarkar case - it is difficult to imagine a situation in which violation of equal protection if law will not be a violation of equality before law.

Question 77

Scope of art 32

Answer 77

1. Court has given itself wide discretion– MC mehta vs UOI– not merely writ jurisdiction. Obligation on the court to protect FR of people.
2. Locus standi - pil
3. Res judicata - already declared cases cannot be reagitated. However, this doctrine doesn’t apply to habeas corpus
4. Laches - can bar after reasonable passage of time.

Question 78

2 cases regarding avoiding misuse of pil. What are the procedural changes now made wrt PIL

Answer 78

SP gupta vs UOI - PIL cannot be used for
- personal gains
- pvt profit
- political consideration

Guruvayoor management commitee vs CK rajan
Court before admitting PIL has to be satisfied about
a. Credentials of applicant
b. Prima facie correctness of the info given in PIL
C . Info shouldn’t be vague and indefinite

Procedural changes that were brought about to prevent misuse
1. Specify the Fr/ legal rt violated
2. Proscribed letters being directly addressed to the judges
3. PIL cell

Question 79

Conclusion for FR vs DPSP

Answer 79

Nani palkivala - no conflict between FR and DPSP. DPs are directory ends for the government while FRs are permissible means for achieving those ends. The conviction underlying the constn is that a honest and competent govt should be able to achieve the directory end by permissible means.

Question 80

3 cases for FD

Answer 80

AIIMS Students union vs AIIMS - FD equally important like fundamental rights, though the former is uneforecrable. Both are prefixed with the same word “ Fundamental “

Mc mehta vs UOI - art 51 A (g) – duty of central govt to introduce compulsory teachings of envt protection in all edn institutions

51A (c) – aruna roy vs UOI – teachings about different relegions was held to be not violative of art 28 as it prmotes A(c) – harmony and spirit of common Brotherhood.

Question 81

Sarkari commission recco

Answer 81

1. Appointment of governor - consult CM, eminent in some, outside state, detached figure without intense political links, not a member of ruling party
2. Removal - before 5 yrs only in rare circumstances, opportunity to explain their conduct and fair consideration to such explanation
3. 356 sparingly

Question 82

Punchi commn recoo

Answer 82

1. Impeachment of gov - art 61 of prez
2. Scope of discretionary powers under art 163 (2) should be narrowly construed
3. Time limit to take decioon to grant assent or reserve for president

Question 83

Conclusion for federalism

Answer 83

Why so best explained by J. MH Beg in state of Rajasthan vs UOI - extent of federalism in india is largely watered down by the means of progress and development of a country which has to be nationally integrated, politically and economically coordinated and socially, intellectually and spiritually uplifted

Question 84

Gubernatorial procrastination

Answer 84

Intro - Telangana govt, neet bill of Tamil Nadu, Kerala university amendment bill

1. 3 primary issues with art 200
2. Absence of time limit
3. Discretion to reserve for president against express advice of COM
4. Claim that governor can kill any bill by withholding assent
5. When SC considered the petition filed by Telangana government
6. As mentioned in art 200, governor should return bill that they do not agree to “ as soon as possible “
7. The expression “ as soon as possible “ contains significant constitutional content and must be borne in mind by constitutional authorities
8. In a previous case - Purushottam nambudiri case - though timeline for governor to give assent, gov must honour the will of the legislature and act in harmony with com

4, NCRWC - timeline of 6 months

Constn silences shouldn’t give way for constn inaction