NDLI: Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo Vs. Union of India and State of Bihar (and Other Cases)

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Constitution ·(First Amendment) Act Arts 31B 31A 1951
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case Type	Special Leave Petition
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Petition Dismissed
Headnote	Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, Arts, 314, 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—Procedure—Bill amended by Legislature—Amendment curtailing fundamental rights—Amendment affecting land—Validity of Amending Act.The Constitution (First Amendment) 'Act, 1951, which has inserted, inter alia, Arts. 31A and 31B in the Constitution of India is riot 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 Parliament and the President separately and not to the Parliament, 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 confined to such powers as could be exercised by · the provisional Parliament consisting of a single chamber, but are wide enough to include the power to amend the Constitution conferred 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 beyond the powers conferred on him by Art. 392 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 Parliament 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 contemplate any amendment of a Bill for amendment of the Constitution 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.Although "Iaw" must ordinarily include constitutional law there is a clear demarcation between ordinary law which is made in the exercise of legislative power and constitutional law, which is made in the exercise of constituent power. In. the context of Art. 13, "law" must be taken to mean rules or regulations made in exercise of ordinary legislative power and not amendments to the constitution made in the exercise of constituent power with the result that Art. 13(2) does not affect amendments made under Art. 368. Articles 31A and 31B inserted in the Constitution by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, do not curtail the powers of the High Court under Art. 226 to issue writs for enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III or of the Supreme Court under Arts. 132 and 136 to entertain appeals from orders issuing or refusing such writs; but they only exclude from the purview of Part III certain classes of cases. These articles therefore do not require ratification under cl. (b) of the proviso to Art. 368. Articles 3!A and 31B are not invalid on the ground that they relate to land which is a matter covered by the State List (item 18 of List II) as these articles are essentially amendments of the Constitution, and Parliament alone has the power to enact them.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Patanjali Sastri
Neutral Citation	1951 INSC 47
Petitioner	Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo
Respondent	Union Of India And State Of Bihar (and Other Cases)
SCR	[1952] 1 S.C.R. 89
Judgement Date	1951-10-05
Case Number	166

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo Vs. Union of India and State of Bihar (and Other Cases)

Please Log-in to view this content

Sri Bhimsen Gupta Vs. Sri Bishwanath Prasad Gupta

Purushothaman Nambudiri Vs. The State of Kerala

Sri Tarsem Singh Vs. Sri Sukhminder Singh

Rajendra Pratap Singh Vs. Rameshwar Prasad

Sri Devendra Prasad Sharma Vs. The State of Mizoram and Ors.

Dr. Umrao Singh Choudhary Vs. State of M.p. and Anr.

Sampat Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.

M.s.r. Prasad Vs. Bommisetti Subba Rao and Ors.

Vikram Deo Singh Tomar Vs. State of Bihar

Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo Vs. Union of India and State of Bihar (and Other Cases)

Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo Vs. Union of India and State of Bihar (and Other Cases)

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Sri Bhimsen Gupta Vs. Sri Bishwanath Prasad Gupta

Purushothaman Nambudiri Vs. The State of Kerala

Sri Tarsem Singh Vs. Sri Sukhminder Singh

Rajendra Pratap Singh Vs. Rameshwar Prasad

Sri Devendra Prasad Sharma Vs. The State of Mizoram and Ors.

Dr. Umrao Singh Choudhary Vs. State of M.p. and Anr.

Sampat Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.

M.s.r. Prasad Vs. Bommisetti Subba Rao and Ors.

Vikram Deo Singh Tomar Vs. State of Bihar

Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo Vs. Union of India and State of Bihar (and Other Cases)