State Of Punjab vs Sat Pal Dang & Ors on 30 July, 1968
Arts. 311 ( 2 ) and 3 20 ( 1 ) ( c ) were read as directory
notwithstanding the mandatory language. Further it is
interesting to note that the Parliament Act of 1911 in
England has an identical provision enjoining. certification
by the Speaker. However May in his 'Parliamentary Practice'
gives numerous instances of Money Bills (from 1914 onwards)
certified by the Deputy Speaker (see p. 842).
Further again, there is Article 212 clause (1) which
provides that the validity of any proceeding in the
Legislature of a State shall not be called in question on
the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure. This
clause was invoked in respect of a Money Bill in Patna Zilla
Brick Owners Association and others v. State of Bihar and
others(1) following a case of this Court in M/s. Mangalore
Ganesh Bedi Works v. The State of Mysore & Another(2). We
are entitled to rely upon this provision. Our conclusion
gets strength from another fact. There is no suggestion
even that the Appropriation Bills were not Money Bills or
included any matter other than that provided in Article 199
or were not passed by the Assembly. It is 'also significant
that the Speaker wrote to the Chairman of the Legislative
Council that there was no certificate by him and that he had
adjourned the Assembly when the Bills were adopted but the
Legislative Council in spite of objection considered and
passed the two, Bills and the Governor assented to them. We
are of opinion that the two Bills were duly certified.
This concludes the whole case and the-events on which it
is based. Mr. Garg contended for a larger issue. He said
that the Legislature should not be at the mercy of the
Governor and the absolute field of action open to the
Legislature and the Speaker would be unreasonably cut down
and thus lead to assumption of absolute powers by Governors.
We do not entertain any such apprehensions. The situation
created in the State of Punjab was unique and was
reminiscent of happenings in the age of the Stuarts. The
action of the Governor appears to be drastic. It was,
however, constitutional and resulted from a desire to set
right a desperate situation. As Bacon once said, no
remedies cause so much pain as those which are efficacious.
For the reasons given above we allow the appeals, set
aside the judgment of the High Court and order the dismissal
of the two petitions with costs.