words per minute
10
now4p
00:00
Speed
Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo vs Union Of India And State Of ... on 5 October, 1951
Equivalent citations: 1951 AIR 458, 1952 SCR 89
Author: M P Sastri
Bench: Kania, Hiralal J. (Cj), Sastri, M. Patanjali, Mukherjea, B.K., Das, Sudhi Ranjan, Aiyar, N. Chandrasekhara
PETITIONER:
SRI SANKARI PRASAD SINGH DEO
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA AND STATE OF BIHAR(And Other Cases).
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
05/10/1951
BENCH:
SASTRI, M. PATANJALI
BENCH:
SASTRI, M. PATANJALI
KANIA, HIRALAL J. (CJ)
MUKHERJEA, B.K.
DAS, SUDHI RANJAN
AIYAR, N. CHANDRASEKHARA
CITATION:
1951 AIR 458 1952 SCR 89
CITATOR INFO :
F 1952 SC 252 (1,30)
RF 1954 SC 257 (4)
R 1959 SC 395 (28)
E&D 1959 SC 512 (4)
F 1965 SC 845 (20,21,23,24,25,27,33,35,38,39
R 1965 SC1636 (25)
O 1967 SC1643 (12,14,23,27,43,44,56,59,61,63
RF 1973 SC1461 (16,20,27,30,32,38,39,44,46,88
RF 1975 SC1193 (17)
RF 1975 SC2299 (649)
RF 1980 SC1789 (96)
RF 1980 SC2056 (61)
RF 1980 SC2097 (6)
D 1981 SC 271 (19,33,42,43)
RF 1986 SC1272 (78)
RF 1986 SC1571 (34)
RF 1987 SC1140 (3)
ACT:
Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, Arts. 31A,
31B-Validity--Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 13(2),
368, 379, 392--Provisional Parliament--Power to amend
Constitution- Constitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order
No. 2 of 1950--Validity --Amendment of Constitution--Proce-
dure--Bill amended by Legislature--Amendment curtailing
fundamental rights--Amendment affecting land--Validity of
Amending Act.
HEADNOTE:
The Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, which has
inserted, inter alia, Arts. 31A and 3lB in the Constitution
of India is not ultra vires or unconstitutional.
The provisional Parliament is competent to exercise the
power of amending the Constitution under Art. 368. The fact
that the said article refers to the two Houses of the Par-
liament and the President separately and not to the Parlia-
ment, does not lead to the inference that the body which is
invested with the power to amend is not the Parliament but a
different body consisting of the two Houses.
The words "all the powers conferred by the provisions of
this Constitution on Parliament" in Art. 379 are not con-
fined to such powers as could be exercised by the provision-
al Parliament consisting of a single chamber, but are wide
enough to include the power to amend the Constitution con-
ferred by Art. 368.
The Constitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order No. 2
made by the President on the 26th January, 1950, which
purports to adapt Art. 368 by omitting "either House of"
and "in each House" and substituting "Parliament" for "that
House" is not
12
90
beyond the powers conferred on him by Art. 39:1 and ultra
vires. There is nothing in Art. 392 to suggest that the
President should wait, before adapting a particular article,
till the occasion actually arose for the provisional Parlia-
ment to exercise the power conferred by the article.
The view that Art. 368 is a complete code in itself in
respect of the procedure provided by it and does not contem-
plate any amendment of a Bill for amendment of the Constitu-
tion after it has been introduced, and that if the Bill is
amended during its passage through the House, the amendment
Act cannot be said to have been passed in conformity with
the procedure prescribed by Art. 368 and would be invalid,
is erroneous.