Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. High sounding, well-intentioned, radical directive of 'participation of workers in management' of Industries, an important golden relic of 42nd amendment has with stood scrapping by and scrutiny of 44th Amendment and is still enshrined as Article 43A of the Constitution. Whether this directive accepted and honoured or kept as a decoration and illumination of statute only, is a question on which legislature and, not judiciary, can adjudicate.

2. The echo of this Article which was a red letter day for the workers (Kamgars) in consonance with preamble proclaiming inter alia 'Justice Social, & economic and equality of Status and Opportunity for the lowest in the ladder may now be first heard in the following historical directive of part IV:

68. In view of the above discussion, I am not inclined to enter into all other controversies raised by Shri Garg that the regulation violates Article 14 & 19 of the Constitution of India.

69. I am also not inclined to hold that 44th Amendment of the Constitution is invalid. On the contrary, I am of the opinion that 44th Amendment so far as it abolishes the right to property by deletion of Article 31 in the Constituton from Part III is valid. As held in Keshvanand Bharti's case 1973 AIR SC 1461 and Minerva Mills' case that the Parliament has got power to amend the constitution except with the limited restrictions that it cannot alter the basic of the Constitution. The right to property which was earlier a fundamental right has been abolished by the Constitutional Amendment and its abolition from the Chapter of fundamental rights, in no way alters the basic features/structure of the Constitution of India.

77. In the words of Krishna Iyer, J., if all the Judges of the Supreme Court in solemn session sit and deliberate for half a year to produce amendment in the Constitution for giving socio-economic justice, their genius will let them down if the essay is to bring harmony and balance between Constitutional obligation and Constitutional mandate. Pinching poverty knows no 'harmony or balance.

78. The Statement of objects of the 45th Amendment Bill (which became the 44th Amendment Act) provided that "In view of the special position sought to be given to fundamental rights, the right to property... would cease to be fundamental right and become only a legal right. It would not effect the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. Similarly, the right of persons holding land for personal cultivation and within the ceiling limit to receive compensation at the market value would not be affected." Basu in his book has said that "the abolition of the guaranteed right against the legislature would hit one poor man more than a capitalist. In my opinion, Basu forget that pinching poverty " DD Basu Constitution of India 8th Ed. 682 is total absence of property. If property right is abolished, property it would be shared by poor through State.

81. I would have dealt with in Length all the cases from Sankari Prasad AIR 1951 SC 428, Sajjan Singu (Ibid), Golaknath AIR 1967 SC 1643, Kesavanand Bharati supra) Indira Gandhi supra), Habeas Corpus AIR 1976 SC 1207, Assembly Dissolution AIR 1977 SC 1361 Minerva Mills (supra), Waman Rao (supra), Bhimsingh (supra) and transfer of Judge's case (supra) far elaborating the concept of basic structure under the Indian Constitution. However, I find that concept the solitary view of Hon'ble Justice Tulzapurkar, nowhere the right of the property has been given at prime place. I, therefore, hold that the right to property as contained in Article 31, fundamental right before 44th Amendment was never an essential-basic -feature of the basic structure of the Constitution and therefore the parliament was within its competence under Article 368 to delete it by 44th Amendment. I hold that 44th Amendment is intra vires to this limited extent,