Constitution Law 1 Flashcards

Question

Who are the SEBC according to balaji vs state of mysore

Answer 1

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)

Answer 2

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

Answer 3

PGIMER vs faculty association - only one post then like 100% reservation. Chebrolu Leela Prasad case - 100% reservation for st teachers

Answer 4

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 5. Rajiv kumar gupta - emphatic expression. 6. BK pavitra vs UOI- it’s an enunciation of the substantive equality put forth in 16(1) Exception - facet- expression- enunciation

Answer 5

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

Answer 6

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

Answer 7

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

Answer 8

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)

Answer 9

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

Answer 10

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

Answer 11

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.

Answer 12

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

Answer 13

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

Answer 14

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

Answer 15

1. Bhim singh vs uoi - mla was detained | 2. Sube singh case - custodial torture

Answer 16

No.. Bcoz it's for public purpose (art 23(2)) | DN GUPTA vs STATE OF MP

Answer 17

1. Maintain and establish 2. Manage religious affairs 3. Movable and immovable property 4. Administer such Nelson vs kalyanam pastorate - no right to mismanagement

Answer 18

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

Answer 19

Fertilizer corporation kamgar vs UOI

Answer 20

``` Habeas corpus Mandamus Prohibition Ceritori Quo warranto ```

Answer 21

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

Answer 22

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

Answer 23

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

Answer 24

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

Answer 25

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

Answer 26

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

Answer 27

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

Answer 28

``` 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

Answer 29

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

Answer 30

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

Answer 31

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.

Answer 32

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 1. 200 2. 356 3. Administrator of adjoining territory 4. Appoint CM 5. Dossolve com

Answer 33

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

Answer 34

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

Answer 35

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

Answer 36

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).

Answer 37

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

Answer 38

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

Answer 39

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

Answer 40

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)

Answer 41

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.

Answer 42

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

Answer 43

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

Answer 44

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)

Answer 45

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)

Answer 46

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

Answer 47

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.

Answer 48

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

Answer 49

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

Answer 50

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

Answer 51

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.

Answer 52

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.

Answer 53

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.

Answer 54

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

Answer 55

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.

Answer 56

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.

Answer 57

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

Answer 58

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

Answer 59

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

Answer 60

Intro - Telangana govt, neet bill of Tamil Nadu, Kerala university amendment bill 1. 3 primary issues with art 200 1. Absence of time limit 2. Discretion to reserve for president against express advice of COM 3. Claim that governor can kill any bill by withholding assent 2. When SC considered the petition filed by Telangana government 1. As mentioned in art 200, governor should return bill that they do not agree to “ as soon as possible “ 2. The expression “ as soon as possible “ contains significant constitutional content and must be borne in mind by constitutional authorities 3. 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

Constitution Law 1 Flashcards

(84 cards)