Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In Jayashree Chamanlal Buddhbhatti's case (supra) a preliminary inquiry was held against the Respondent Buddhbhatti. The charges were not informed to her and she was not given an opportunity of hearing in respect thereof. It is in the facts of the said case the Apex Court held that the principles of natural justice were violated and accordingly set aside the order of termination.

In I. R. Coelho (Dead) by Lrs' case (supra), the issue that was referred to the 5 Judges Bench of the Apex Court was whether on or after 24-4- 1973 when the basic structure doctrine was propounded, is it permissible for Parliament under Article 31-B to immunise legislations from being struck down for violation of fundamental rights by inserting them into the Ninth Schedule and, it so, what is its effect on the power of judicial review of the Courts. The lgc 13 of 18 (901) wp-5941.16.doc 5 Judge Bench of the Apex Court in the process of adjudication of the said issue referred to two of its earlier decision i.e. The State of West Bengal v/s. Anwar Ali Sarkar reported in (1952) SCR 284 and Kathi Raning Rawat v/s. State of Saurashtra reported in (1952) SCR 435 wherein it was held that equality and arbitrariness are sworn enemies, once belongs to the rule of law in a republic, while the other to the whim and caprice of an absolute monarch. Where an act is arbitrary, it is implicit in it that it is unequal both according to political logic and constitutional law and is therefore violative of Article 14. Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness in State action and ensures fairness and equality of treatment.