Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

We have noticed the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners while assailing the constitutional validity of Section 23(4)(b). The thrust of the argument is that there is wide scope for exercising the power arbitrarily under Section 23(4)(b) by making any transaction under transfer scheme binding on third parties. Even assuming that there is such a scope to abuse the power under Section 23(4)(b), that circumstance itself would not be a valid ground to invalidate the enactment unconstitutional. The individual transaction is open to challenge in such a case. It is contended that Section 23(4)(b) empowers the State Government to transfer arbitrarily any amount from one head of account to completely unrelated head of account. We do not think that Section 23(4)(b) permits the State Government to do so. Be that as it may, in a given case, if the Government exercises the power under Section 23(4)(b) in the manner apprehended or visualised by the petitioners, the validity of such wrongful action can be assailed before the Constitutional Courts by way of judicial review but the mere scope of abuse of power cannot undoubtedly be a ground to declare such enactment as unconstitutional. It is relevant to note that by force of provisions of Section 23(4)(b), none of the rights of the third parties flowing from or guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300-A of the Constitution are impaired or destroyed. Obviously Section 23(4)(b) is enacted in the Reform Act to provide for the smooth reorganisation of the power sector envisaged under the Reform Act by effecting transfer of properties and rights. If we keep in mind the objective of the delegation of power to the State Government to reorganize power sector by issuing transfer schemes and the context iu which Section 23(4)(b) is enacted, it cannot be said that Section 23(4)(b) suffers from vice of excessive delegation. We do not find any merit in the plea that Section 23(4)(b) is unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300-A of the Constitution.