Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. Commencing from Kesavananda Bharathi's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had several occasions to consider the concept of basic structure of the constitution. The independence of the Judiciary and separation of powers between the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary have been held to be basic structures of the constitution by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In Paragraph No.555 of the Judgment in Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain reported in 1975 supp (SC) 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows;-

"The Constitution is a document recording an act of entrustment and conveyance by the people of India, the political sovereign, of legal authority to act on its behalf to a "Sovereign Democratic Republic". This Constitution has a basic structure comprising the three organs of the Republic; the Executive, the Legislature, and Judiciary. It is through each of these organs that the Sovereign Will of the people has to operate and manifest itself and not through only one of them. Neither of these three separate organs of the Republic can take over the function assigned to the other. This is the basic structure or scheme of system of Government of the Republic laid down in this Constitution whose identity cannot, according to the majority view in Kesavananda Bharati case be changed even by restoring to Article 368."

12. In Santhosh Kumar Sathishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra reported in 2009 (6) SCC 498, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has again reiterated that both the separation of powers and independence of judiciary are basic structures of the constitution.

13. It has also been held in State of W.B v. Committee for Production of Democratic Rights reported in 2010 (3) SCC 571 that whenever the action of the legislature makes intrusion thereby causing violation to the basic structures, it is for the higher judiciary to invoke its powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the same as void.

15. Therefore, an award made by the Labour Court under the provisions of the Act is an adjudicatory order and the same is enforceable. Since the Labour Court has been held to be a Court, the award passed by the Court is to be executed and the same cannot be allowed to be nullified either by the executive or by the legislature. At this juncture, I may refer to a recent Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Glanrock Estate (P) Ltd., Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu reported in CDJ 2010 SC 795, wherein the Chief Justice of India [Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.H.KAPADIA], presiding over a three Judges Bench, has made a deep survey of various "doctrines" "concepts" and "principles" relating to the limitations on the power of the Parliament to enact any law or to amend the constitution. The paramount limitation is in respect of the basic structure of the Constitution. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further proceeds to remind the distinction between constitutional law and ordinary law in a rigid constitution like ours. The Hon'ble Supreme Court describes the distinction as follows;-