Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. The hearing of these Writ Petitions that began some time before the onset of the summer vacation could not be concluded before the Courts closed for the summer recess and at that stage the learned Advocate General moved for vacating the interim orders made in these petitions. I rejected that motion pointing out interalia that the Writ Petitions were being heard on their merits and, therefore, the continuance of the interim orders for some more time would not matter. On the re-opening of the Courts the hearing of the Writ Petitions was resumed and heard at great length with a large number of Counsel taking part on behalf of the petitioners prominent amongst them being Mr B.T.Parthasarathy, Sri Ko.Channabasappa, Barrister Vasudeva Reddy, Sri.Veerabhadrappa, Sri.Vishwanatha Shetty, Sri.Raya Reddy and Sri.Gangi Reddy and Sri.Jayakumar Patil. On behalf of the State arguments were addressed by the learned Advocate General supported by the learned Government Advocate. No one actually appeared for the Deputy Commissioners and the Administrators at the beginning but as the hearing was almost drawing to a close the State Government engaged the services of Senior Counsel Sri S.G. Sundaraswamy, Sri R.N.Narasimha Murthy, Sri B.V.Acharya and Sri T.S.Ramachandra to represent the several Administrators impleaded as party-respondents in these Petitions. The hearing which spread over 23 days led to a lot of arguments touching a variety of grounds starting from dry stick statutory rights rising to the sacrosanct fiats in the Constitution. Time and again reference was made to the Preamble to the Constitution which ensured according to the petitioners the undisturbed flow of democracy and the democratic process, purposefully articulated by the Directive Principles of the Constitution with particular reference to Article 40 providing a special niche for village administration and rural upliftment. Emotional arguments were advanced drawing upon the dream of the Father of our Nation Mahatma Gandhi whose belief in Grama Samaj was almost a by-word. Some argument was also advanced contending that Act 1 of 1992 had violated the basic structure of the Constitution, and that the aspirations of the people being dashed to the ground by stopping the wheels of democracy even as they were spinning. Learned Counsel, expressed deep anguish at this kind of a undemocractic spin off set in motion by a Government that was democractically elected by the popular will of the people of Karnataka. I was therefore, called upon to interfere in the matter and quash not merely the offending enactment i.e., Act 1/1992 but also the orders passed by Deputy Commissioners appointing Administrators to the Panchayats in question.

28. The Preamble to the Constitution sets out the goals and undoubtedly one of the cherished goals enjoined by the Preamble is securing and preserving of democracy. Instead of dilating on what the Preamble says, it would be appropriate to set it out. It reads:

"WE, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign socialist secular democratic Republic and to secure to all its citizens:
Justice Social, economic and political;
Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
"I find it impossible to subscribe to the view that the Preamble of the Constitution holds the key to its basic structure or that the preamble is too holy to suffer a human touch. Constitutions are written, if they are written, in the rarefied atmosphere of high ideology, whatever be the ideology. Preambles of written Constitutions are intended primarily to reflect the hopes and aspirations of people. They reasonate the ideal which the Nation seeks to achieve, the target, not the achievement. In parts, therefore, they are metaphysical like slogans. For example, the concept of Fraternity which is referred to in our preamble is not carried into any provision of the Constitution and the concept is hardly suitable for encasement in a coercive legal formula. The Preamble, generally, uses words of 'Passion and power' in order to move the hearts of men and stir them into action. Its own meaning and implication being in doubt, the preamble cannot affect or throw light on the meaning of the enacting words of the Constitution. Therefore, though our preamble was voted upon and is a part of the Constitution, it is really 'a preliminary statement of the reasons' which made the passing of the Constitution necessary and desirable. As observed by Gajendragadkar, J in Enclaves what Willoughby has said about the Preamble to the American Constitution, namely, that it has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power, is equally true about the prohibitions and limitations. The Preamble of our Constitution cannot therefore be regarded as a source of any prohibitions or limitations."

(underlining by me) The authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court and the Federal Court adumbrated hereinbefore appear to leave no room for canvassing the invalidity of the legislation on the ground that it defies the Preamble to the Constitution. The view appears to be, as I have understood it, the many ideas visulised by the Constitution as reflected in the Preamble are ideals more. Utopian in nature with the result more often than not legislation may not vibe with the glorious aspirations of the Preamble and as alleged by the petitioners herein may even result in giving a go-by to the ideals enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution. At any rate, I certain the validity of a law however cannot depend upon the extent it accords with or detracts from the Preamble.