eng
competition

Text Practice Mode

My first order6

created Jul 24th, 10:53 by pankajsrivastava


1


Rating

317 words
15 completed
00:00
Constitution of India, Arts. 13(2), 368, 245, 248, Schedule
7,  List  1.  Entry 97-Power  to  amend     Constitution  where
resides-Whether resides in Art. 368 or in residuary power of
Parliament  under  Art.     248  read with     Entry    97  List  1-
Fundamental  Rights in Part III whether can be    amended     and
abridged by the procedure in Art. 368-Law' under Art.  13(2)
Whether      Includes   constitutional   amendments-Scheme      of
Consitution  Fundamental  rights  whether  intended  to      be
permanent  and    unamendable-Amendment  whether    exercise  of
sovereign power-Amendment whether a political matter outside
the purview of courts.
Constitution   Seventeenth  Amendment    Act,,    1964-Whether
invalid for contravention of Art. 13(2).
Prospective  overruling, doctrine of-Vast  agrarian  changes
under constitutional amendments-Necessity of preserving past
while protecting future decisis.
Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (Act 10 of  1953)-
Mysore    Land Reforms Act (Act 10 of 1962) as amended by     Act
14  of    1965-Acts  contravening     fundamental  rights-Whether
valid.
 
 
 
HEADNOTE:
The  validity  of the Punjab Security of Land  Tenures    Act,
1953  (Act  10 of 1953) and of the Mysore Land    Reforms     Act
(Act 10 of 1962) as amended by Act 14 of 1965 was challenged
by the petitioners under Art. 32 of the Constitution.  Since
these  Acts  were  included  in     the  9th  Schedule  to     the
Constitution  by  the Constitution  (Seventeenth)  Amendment
Act,  1964, the validity of the said Amendment Act was    also
challenged.   In this connection it was urged  that  Sankari
Prasad's  case    in which the validity  of  the    constitution
(First)     Amendment  Act,  1951 had been     upheld     and  Sajjan
Singh's     case  in  which the validity  of  the    Constitution
(Seventeenth)  Amendment Act, 1964, had been upheld by    this
Court,    had  been wrongly decided.  It    was  contended    that
Parliament had no   power  to  amend fundamental  rights  in
Part III of the Constitution.
HELD:    Per  Subba  Rao,  C.J.,     Shah,    Sikri,    Shelat     and
Vaidialingam, JJ.   (Hidayatullah,    J.    Concurring)       :
Fundamental Rights cannot be abridged    or taken away by the
amending  procedure  in Ail. 368 of  the  Constitution.      An
amendment to the Constitution is 'law' within the meaning of
Art.  13(2)  and  is therefore subject to Part    III  of     the

saving score / loading statistics ...