Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Attention was invited to Articles 256 and 257 of the Constitution. Article 256 provides that the executive power of every State shall be so exercised as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and 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. Article 257 deals with the control of the Union over States in certain cases. Sub-Art. (2) of Article 257 states that the executive power of the Union shall also extend to the giving of directions to .a State as to the construction and maintenance of means of communication, declared in the direction to be of national or military importance, Sub-Art. (3) states that the executive power of the Union shall also extend to the giving of directions to a State as to the measures to be taken for the protection of the railways within the State. Learned counsel submitted that since executive power can be exercised by the officers of the Union or the State, and the Union is competent to give directions to the State or its authorities, the officers of the Union are also competent to give directions to State officers to exercise executive powers of the Union in the State. The railway was a Union subject and the Union Government or its officers accordingly could give directions to the State Authorities in respect of the maintenance or protection of the railways within the State. The District Magistrate it was urged had, in the instant case, acted under the orders issued by the Railway administration for the protection of the Railways. The Chief Engineer, Northern Railway, had thus competently asked the District Magistrate to restrain felling of trees on the Railway track. In substance it was the exercise of Union executive through an officer of the State in respect of a matter specifically covered by Article 257(3). The orders thus were not without jurisdiction and were valid.

trate, Meerut passed the order dated 11-7-1975 restraining the parties concerned from cutting them. The petitioners having come to know of this order approached the District Magistrate and filed their objections. The detailed order affirming the order dated 11-7-1975 was passed on 7-8-1975. Learned counsel for the respondent supported these orders on the basis of the provisions of Articles 256 and 257 of the Constitution, We are unable to agree with the contention raised. The executive power of the Union or the State is exercised in the manner provided by Articles 77 and 166 of the Constitution respectively. The manner in which the power is exercised was explained by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Samsher Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1974 SC 2192). Paragraph 30 of the report stated the position thus: