Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(Order of the Court was made by P.K.MISRA,J) Heard Mr.A.D.C.Gurusamy, the petitioner in person. He has filed this writ petition with the following prayers.

"(a)to close the High Court of Madras at the Principal Seat at Chennai as well as the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court till the sanctioned strength OF judges are filled-up, since the Constitution of the High Court with sanctioned strength of High Court Judges is more fundamental Basic Frame Work or Basic Structure of the Constitution than Fundamental Rights enunciated in Part-III of the Constitution'

3.More serious prayer is contained in prayer No.(b). The petitioner is challenging the validity of the Seventh Constitution Amendment Act, 1956. More particularly he challenges the provisions contained in Sections 11, 12 and 15 of such Constitution Amendment Act. The main contention is to the effect that the said amendment of the Constitution contravenes the basic structure of the Constitution and therefore such amendment should be declared ultra vires by following the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in Kesavananda vs. State of Kerala, reported in AIR 1973 SC 1461.

5.Under Section 12 of such Constitution Amendment Act, Article 217 was amended. As per the original provision contained in Article 217, it was provided that Judges would hold office until the age of 60 years. After the amendment, the effect of the provision is that a permanent Judge holds office until he attains the age of 62 years, whereas an Additional or Acting Judge holds office for the term indicated in Article 224. This is only a consequential amendment and it also does not per se affect the basic structure of the Constitution in any manner.

We do not find anything in such Objects and Reasons which would support the contention of the petitioner that by the above amendments the basic structure of the Constitution was sought to be amended.

10.The petitioner further contended that by making appointment of Additional Judges for a period not exceeding two years, a signal is given as if the particular judge is under probation or scrutiny and this ultimately affects the independence of the judiciary, which can be considered to be one of the basic structure of the Constitution of India.