Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

131. [126 B-C] (Concurring with the majority) 2(a) There is no justification for reading down the provisions of the Act nor are the provisions constitutionally invalid on any account. [137 C]

(b) The Indian Constitution is not federal in character, but has been characterised as quasi-federal in nature. Even though the executive and legislative functions of the Centre and States have been defined and distributed, there runs through it all a thread or rein in the hands of the Centre in both the fields. Apart from the exclusive legislative power of the Centre and the States, both have concurrent powers of legislation in regard to the entries of List III. The residuary power lies with the Parliament (Art. 248, Entry 97 of List I). Parliament has a predominant hand in respect of matters in the concurrent list (Art. 254). In certain circumstances, Parliament has power to legislate on matters in the State List (Articles 249, 250, 252 and 253). Article 256 provides, inter alia, that the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose. There are also other important features which demonstrate the weak federal structure and the controlling hand of the Centre over the States. The Governor is appointed by the President and holds office at his pleasure. He reports to the Centre from time to time about the administration of the State. Entry 45 in List II empowers the Parliament to legislate on the subject of inquiries for the purpose of any of the matters specified in List II. Parliament has power to admit into the Union, or establish, new States (Art. 2) and can make a law for the formation of new States and alteration of areas and boundaries if existing States (Art. 3). [128 A-D; 129 C-E] State of West, Bengal v. Union of India [1964] 1 S.C.R. 371 referred to.

(j)Articles 256 and 257 list the obligations of the States and the Union and control of the Union over the States in certain cases. Article 257(A) (introduced by 42nd Amendment of the Constitution) empowers the Government of India to deploy any armed forces of the Union or any other force for dealing with any grave situation of law and order in any State. Except in cases referred to in these Articles, the Constitution does not provide for the Union Government to give any directions to the State Government. As there is no specific article in the Constitution enabling the Union Government to cause an inquiry into the governmental functions of the State the power cannot be assumed by ordinary legislation but resort must be had to a constitutional amendment. [152 C-D; F; H]

"I may point out that there are various aspects of relations between the Union and the States governed by different provisions of the Constitution. I may here refer to those which relate to giving of 'directions' by the Union Government to the State Governments because Art. 365 provides '365. Where any State has failed to comply with or to give effect to any directions given in the exercise of the executive power of the Union under any of the provisions of this Constitution, it shall be lawful for the President to hold that a situation has arisen in which the government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution' Articles 256 and 257 mention a wide range of subjects ,on which the Union Government may give executive directions to State Governments. Article 73(1) (a) of the Constitution tells us that the Executive power of the Union extends to all matters on which 'Parliament has power to make laws'. Article 248 of the Constitution vests exclusively in the Parliament residuary powers of making laws on any matter not enumerated in the Concurrent or State Lists. Article 256 of the Constitution covers cases where the President may want to give directions in exercise of the executive power of the Union to a State Government in relation to a matter covered by an existing law made by Parliament which applies to that State. But, Art. 257(1) imposes a wider obligation upon a State to exercise its powers in such a way as not to impede the exercise of executive power of the Union which, as would appear from Art. 73 of the Constitution, read with Art. 248 may cover even a subject on which there is no existing law but on which some legislation by Parliament is possible. It could, therefore, be argued that although, the. Constitution itself does not lay down specifically when the power of dissolution should be exercised by the Governor on the advice of a Council of Ministers in the State, yet if a direction on that matter was properly given by the Union Government to a State Government, there is a duty to carry it out. The time for the dissolution of a State Assembly is not covered by (1) A.I.R. 1977 S.C. p. 1361,1383-84.

Learned Counsel for the plaintiff has relied also upon the provisions of Chapter 11, Part XI, containing Articles 256 to 263 of the Constitution. Here, we find Articles 256 and 257(1) of the Constitution which we have already examined above to bring out the extent of Government of India's power to give necessary directions to every State. The term "State" used there could not possibly be held to apply merely to a geographical entity or territory. Article-1, sub-article (2) and Article-3 of our Constitution make a distinction between "the State" and its territory. Article 300, in the context of legal proceedings, makes the Government of a State the legal representative of the (1) [1976] 2 S.C.R. 347.