Advocate Aankhi Ghosh writes that it is time to reargue Kesavananda Bharati case and reconsider the Basic Structure doctrine. The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (Kesavananda Bharati) is perhaps the most well-known constitutional decision of the. Kesavananda Bharathi is the case which saved Indian democracy; thanks to Shri Kesavananda Bharati, eminent jurist Nanabhoy Palkhivala and the seven.

Author: Mogis Faugal
Country: Armenia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Music
Published (Last): 8 September 2009
Pages: 323
PDF File Size: 2.84 Mb
ePub File Size: 14.37 Mb
ISBN: 636-2-48847-418-4
Downloads: 62794
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Maurisar

This objective has been, to a large extent, carried out without infringing the fundamental rights.

Quite a good number of the directive principles may be considered to be inviolable in view of the Preamble which sets out the aims and objects of the Constitution. II As early as the thesis that there is a distinction between constitutional law and ordinary law was accepted.

Judgemnt mutt also operates a Sanskrit Veda Patashala and conducts a number of Cultural and art festivals every year. Not only was the Constitution framed in the light of the Preamble but the Preamble was ultimately settled in the light of the Constitution.

The Amendment, passed during the Emergency, validated the election of Ksavananda Gandhi after she was unseated on June 12, by the Allahabad High Court for indulging in corrupt electoral practices. This passage only means that a legislature cannot disregard the procedural conditions imposed on it by the constituent instrument prescribing a particular majority but may amend them if the constituent instrument gives that power.

State of Kerala and Anr. This analysis of the provisions contained in Clauses a and b of the proviso to Article shows that the reason for including certain articles and excluding certain other from the proviso was not that all articles dealing with the federal structure or the status of the States had been selected for inclusion in the proviso. Article is important. From the illustrations he gives of what constitutes the basic structure of the Constitution he does not seem to make much of a distinction between what he calls basic structure and what the other learned Justices have referred to as essential features.

He has contributed immensely for Kannada in the border district of Kasaragod.

It is not right to construe words in vacuum and then insert the meaning into an article. I may here trace the history of the shaping of the Preamble because this would show that kesavanansa Preamble was in conformity with the Constitution as it was finally accepted.


In the absence of such consensus can it be held to be a majority judgment? State of Kerala [] S. The Constituent Assembly deliberately decided not to do so.

Kesavananda Bharati

We have, therefore, no option but to make bjarati Constitution operative in these States on the basis of its acceptance by the Ruler of the Rajpramukh, as the case may be, who will no doubt consult his Council of Ministers. Now I may briefly describe the scheme of the Constitution. This case furnishes an exact example where implied limitations on the power to amend the Constitution have been inferred by no less a body than the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Judgmet you state in the Constitution that the social organisation of the State shall take a particular form, you areā€¦taking away the liberty of the people to decide what should kesavanandda the social organisation in which they wish to live.

There was thus an implied limitation on the amending power which prevented the Parliament from abolishing or changing the identity of the Constitution or any of its Basic Structure. Further, with respect, no authority has been referred before us to establish the proposition that “what is true about the powers is equally true about the prohibitions and limitations.

This proviso shall cease to have effect on a date to be fixed by kesavvananda Governor-General by Proclamation published in the Gazette. Amendment is a legislative process. Reliance on a principle coined by judges kesavananad to uphold the insularity and independence of the judiciary has irony writ large on its face.

The principles set forth in this Part are intended for the general guidance of the appropriate Legislatures and Government in India hereinafter referred to collectively as ‘the State’. In some respects the Commonwealth was placed in a position of supremacy, as the national interest required, but it would be inconsistent with the very basis of the federation that the Commonwealth’s powers should extend to reduce the States to such a position of subordination that their very existence, or at least their capacity to function effectually as independent units, would be dependent upon the manner in which the Commonwealth exercised its powers, rather than on the legal limits of the powers themselves.

Kesavananda Bharati – Wikipedia

The building of a welfare State 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. There is no hint anywhere that abrogation of minorities rights was ever in the contemplation of the important members of the Constituent Assembly.


The Constitution gives so many assurances in Part III that it would be difficult to think that they were the play-things of a special majority. Constition-makers could not have intended that the rights conferred by Part III could not be altered by giving effect to the policies of Part IV. In order to properly appreciate that case, it is bharsti first to have a look at Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo v.

The appointment of a Governor, conditions of service of a Governor, and the Constitution and functions of the Council of Ministers, and other provisions regarding the Ministers and the conduct of government business are not mentioned at all in the proviso to Article Story in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States states: What again is remarkable is that the fundamental rights are not included in the proviso at all.

The Judicial Committee deduced from these provisions thus: Cross points out that there is kesavanajda no distinction between these two senses of the expression until a decision has been interpreted in a subsequent case ibid. Article 39which gives bharwti directions to the State, reads bbarati.

Although the court upheld the basic structure doctrine by only the narrowest of margins, it has since gained widespread acceptance and legitimacy due to subsequent cases and judgments. In the meantime the process of merger and integration of Indian States had been completed bharatl Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel judfment able to tell the Constituent Assembly on October 12,that the new Constitution was “not an alliance between democracies and dynasties, but a real union of the Indian people, built on the basic concept of the sovereignty of the people Shiva Rao’s-Framing of India’s Constitution-A study-pp.

Thus there is secured judgnent freedom from political control, and it is a punishable offence to attempt directly or judvment to influence any decision of the Commission Kdsavananda Ceylon’s Constitution “by L. You can help by adding to it. It is in the latter sense that in my view of the matter, implications have a place in the interpretation of the Constitution: Justice Mohammad Hidayatullah previous Chief Justice of India remarked that “this was an attempt of not creating ‘forward looking judges’ but ‘judges looking forward’ to the office of Chief Justice”.