The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR SC () 4 SCC , is a case decided by a bench of 13 judges of the Supreme Court of. Kesavananda Bharathi is the case which saved Indian democracy; thanks to Shri Kesavananda Bharati, Kesavananda Bharati V. State of Kerala (). The object of this paper is to consider certain aspects of the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in the case of. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala1.

Author: Goltira Nazshura
Country: Togo
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Health and Food
Published (Last): 3 October 2005
Pages: 480
PDF File Size: 1.36 Mb
ePub File Size: 17.73 Mb
ISBN: 571-3-20135-918-8
Downloads: 82431
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Vudolabar

In forwarding the report of the Advisory Committee on the subject of Minority Rights, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, in his report dated August 8,said: It had three significant provisions, which show the kesavanabda of the Constitution-makers regarding property rights. The Constitution vests in the judiciary, the power to adjudicate upon the constitutional validity of all laws.

It is this freedom from tyranny which, according to the petitioners, has been taken away by the impugned Article 31C which has been inserted by the Twenty-fifth Amendment. It seems to me that in the context of the British Plan, the setting up of Minorities Sub-Committee, the Advisory Committee and the proceedings of these Committees, as well as the proceedings in the Constituent Assembly mentioned above, it is impossible to read the expression “Amendment of the Constitution” as empowering Parliament to abrogate the rights of minorities.

Rao and reproduced it in its report of July 4, without any change, with the tacit recognition at that stage that the Preamble would be finally based on the Objectives Resolution.

Amendment of the Schedule.

The words of the Judicial Committee in Ranasinghe’s case, are apposite and pregnant. As originally enacted, Article 1 kesavanahda as follows:.

Accordingly I do not rely on them as aids to construction.

This rule of exclusion has not always been adhered to in America, and sometimes distinction is made between using such material to ascertain the purpose of a statute kerla using it for ascertaining its meaning. It was held that “as a matter of construction of the Act, there was nothing in the Act or its preamble, interpreted in the light of the earlier relevant statutes After making these observations, the learned Judge examined authorities and he found support in Malbourne Keaavananda v.


Archived from the original PDF on 9 September We are, however, not concerned with the interpretation of an ordinary statute. Do rights remain inalienable if they can be amended out of existence? No similar provisions exists in any of the Independence Acts in respect of other countries, enacted kesavnaanda the British Parliament, e. Therefore, a Constitutional amendment will be valid even if it abridges or takes any of the fundamental rights.

There is a limitation on the power of amendment by necessary implication which was apparent from a reading of the preamble and therefore, according to the learned Chief Justice, the expression “amendment of this Constitution”, in Article means any addition or bhwrati in any of the provisions of the Constitution within the broad contours of the preamble, made in order to carry out the basic objectives of the Constitution.

This argument of state was based on the basic principle of Indian Legal System i.

Kesavananda Bharati Vs. State of Kerala – Law Times Journal

The people therein declare, that their design in establishing it comprehended six objects: This Court has in numerous decisions implied similar powers. He further prayed for an appropriate writ or order to issue during the pendency of the petition. He referred to this portion of the speech for the purpose kesavananxa showing the historical background and the circumstances which necessitated giving certain guarantees to the former rulers. Justice Mohammad Hidayatullah previous Chief Justice of India remarked that “this was an attempt of not creating ‘forward looking judges’ but kesavanada looking forward’ to the office of Chief Justice”.


Article A and 31 Kesvananda was also added. Here, all the three words are used giving a comprehensive meaning. This objective has been, to a large extent, carried out without infringing the fundamental rights.

Both these cases were followed by another Constitution bench in U.

Kesavananda Bharati vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 24 April,

Held that the Constitution of India which is essentially a social rather than a political document, is founded on a social philosophy and as such has two main features basic and circumstantial. Ceylon’s Constitution “by L. Provisions relating jesavananda services under the State and Trade and Commerce are also not included in the proviso.

Unfortunately we have no properly constituted Legislatures in the rest of the States apart from Mysore, Saurashtra and Travancore and Cochin Union nor will it be possible to have Legislatures constituted in them before the Constitution of India emerges in its final form. The way the Preamble is drafted leaves no doubt that what follows, or is annexed to, ov Preamble, is the Constitution of India.

India after over years of struggle got Independence from colonial rule kesavanandw Great Britain. Cooray, reads the obiter dicta in Bribery Commissioner v. Again, in Article 2the word “amendment” has been used in a limited sense. State of Punjaband considered the validity of the 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th amendments.

Kesavananda Bharati Vs. State of Kerala

Kamal Nath — Kamal Nath Case. I may now briefly notice the directive principles mentioned in Part IV. It will be noticed that Article is contained in a separate part and the heading is “Amendment of the Constitution”, but the marginal note reads “Procedure for amendment of the Constitution”.

Section 55 provided for the appointment of other Judicial Officers.

Author: admin