Rule of Law in Indian Constitution (Autosaved)

(1)

0 |

0 | P a g eP a g e

RULE OF LAW IN INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Guided By: Dr. Asad Malik

SUBMITTED BY:

MD. ABID HUSSAIN ANSARI

(2)

Acknowledgement

Firstly, I would like to express my profound sense of gratitude towards the almighty “ALLAH” Firstly, I would like to express my profound sense of gratitude towards the almighty “ALLAH” for providing me with the authentic circumstances which were mandatory for the completion of for providing me with the authentic circumstances which were mandatory for the completion of my project.

my project.

Secondly, I am highly indebted to Prof. Dr. Asad Malik at Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia Secondly, I am highly indebted to Prof. Dr. Asad Malik at Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi for providing me with constant encouragement and guidance throughout University, New Delhi for providing me with constant encouragement and guidance throughout the preparation of this project.

the preparation of this project.

Thirdly, I thank the Law library staff who liaised with us in searching material relating to the Thirdly, I thank the Law library staff who liaised with us in searching material relating to the project.

project.

My cardinal thanks are also for my parents, friends and all teachers of law department in our My cardinal thanks are also for my parents, friends and all teachers of law department in our college who have always been the source of my inspiration and motivation without which I college who have always been the source of my inspiration and motivation without which I would have never been able to unabridged my project.

would have never been able to unabridged my project.

My father, a lawyer with large access to books of value has been of great help to me. My father, a lawyer with large access to books of value has been of great help to me.

Without the contribution of the above said people I could have never completed this project. Without the contribution of the above said people I could have never completed this project.

Mohd. Abid Hussain Ansari Mohd. Abid Hussain Ansari B.A.LL.B (Hons) 6

B.A.LL.B (Hons) 6thth Semester Semester 3

(3)

List of Cases

1.

1. SP Gupta v Union of IndiaSP Gupta v Union of India 2.

2. Indira Nehru Gandhi v Raj NarainIndira Nehru Gandhi v Raj Narain 3.

3. State of M.P. v. Bharat SinghState of M.P. v. Bharat Singh 4.

4. Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of PunjabRam Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab 5.

5. Som Raj v. State of HaryanaSom Raj v. State of Haryana 6.

6. Union of India v. President, Madras Bar AssociationUnion of India v. President, Madras Bar Association 7.

7. Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P.Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P. 8.

8. Maganlal Chhaganlal‟s case,Maganlal Chhaganlal‟s case, 9.

9. No Northern India Caterers‟ caserthern India Caterers‟ case 10.

10. Union of India v. Raghubir SinghUnion of India v. Raghubir Singh 11.

11. Chief settlement Commissioner Punjab v. Om PrakashChief settlement Commissioner Punjab v. Om Prakash 12.

12. Binani Zinc Limited v. Kerala State Electricity Board and OBinani Zinc Limited v. Kerala State Electricity Board and O rsrs 13.

13. Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao v. Balasaheb Vikhe PatilGadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao v. Balasaheb Vikhe Patil 14.

14. Sukhdev v. BhagatramSukhdev v. Bhagatram 15.

15. Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi and OrsSecretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi and Ors 16.

16. Amlan Jyoti Borooah v. State of Assam and Amlan Jyoti Borooah v. State of Assam and OrsOrs 17.

17. Bachan Singh v. state of PunjabBachan Singh v. state of Punjab 18.

18. P. sambamurthy v. state of Andhra PradeshP. sambamurthy v. state of Andhra Pradesh 19.

19. Yusuf Khan v. Manohar JoshiYusuf Khan v. Manohar Joshi 20.

20. Frank Anthony Employees‟ Union v. Union oFrank Anthony Employees‟ Union v. Union of Indiaf India 21.

21. Nakara v. Union of India. Nakara v. Union of India. 22.

22. Zee Telifilms v. Union of IndiaZee Telifilms v. Union of India 23.

23. C. Ravichandran Iyer v. J.A.M. BhattacharyaC. Ravichandran Iyer v. J.A.M. Bhattacharya 24.

24. In re Vinay Chandra Mishra‟s caseIn re Vinay Chandra Mishra‟s case 25.

25. DTC v. Mazdoor CongressDTC v. Mazdoor Congress 26.

26. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of IndiaA.K. Kraipak v. Union of India 27.

27. C.B. Muthumma v. Union of IndiaC.B. Muthumma v. Union of India 28.

28. Air India v. Nargesh MeerzaAir India v. Nargesh Meerza 29.

29. Govt. of A.P. v. P.B. VijayakumarGovt. of A.P. v. P.B. Vijayakumar 30.

(5)

31.

31. Vishaka v. State of RajasthanVishaka v. State of Rajasthan 32.

32. Gaurav Jain v. Union of IndiaGaurav Jain v. Union of India 33.

33. I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil NaduI.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu 34.

34. Satwant SinghSatwant Singh 35.

35. Jaisinghani‟s caseJaisinghani‟s case 36.

36. Olmstead v. United States:Olmstead v. United States: 37.

37. Mohamed v. President of the Republic of South Africa.Mohamed v. President of the Republic of South Africa. 38.

38. Glanrock Estate (P) Ltd v. The State Glanrock Estate (P) Ltd v. The State Of Tamil NaduOf Tamil Nadu 39.

39. Smt. Shakti Kumari Gupta v. State Of U.P. Smt. Shakti Kumari Gupta v. State Of U.P. And Ors.And Ors. 40.

40. National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh and Anr. National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh and Anr. 41.

41. Erusian Equipment and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of West Bengal and AnrErusian Equipment and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of West Bengal and Anr 42.

42. A.K. Chaudhary And A.K. Chaudhary And Ors. v. The Ors. v. The State Of State Of Gujarat And 2 OrGujarat And 2 Ors.,s., 43.

43. A.P.Abbu Gounder v. D.K.GoelA.P.Abbu Gounder v. D.K.Goel 44.

44. Maninderjit Singh Bitta v. Union of India and oManinderjit Singh Bitta v. Union of India and othersthers 45.

45. Association of Registration of Plates v. Union of IndiaAssociation of Registration of Plates v. Union of India 46.

46. Manohar Lal Sharma v. The Manohar Lal Sharma v. The Principle Secretary & Others,Principle Secretary & Others, 47.

47. Madhu Limaye v. Supdt. Tihar Jail DelhiMadhu Limaye v. Supdt. Tihar Jail Delhi 48.

48. Sanaboina Satyanarayan v. Govt. of A.PSanaboina Satyanarayan v. Govt. of A.P 49.

49. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v. R. VeeraswamyTamil Nadu Electricity Board v. R. Veeraswamy 50.

50. Shankari Prasad v. Union of IndiaShankari Prasad v. Union of India 51.

51. Sajjan Singh v. State of RajasthanSajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan 52.

52. Golaknath v. State of PunjabGolaknath v. State of Punjab 53.

53. Keshavananda Bharti v. State of KeralaKeshavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala 54.

54. Raman Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of IndiaRaman Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India 55.

55. In re: Arundhati RoyIn re: Arundhati Roy 56.

56. Sheela Barse v. State of MaharashtraSheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra 57.

57. Veena Sethi v. State of BiharVeena Sethi v. State of Bihar 58.

58. Medical and Educational Charitable Trust v. State of Tamil NaduMedical and Educational Charitable Trust v. State of Tamil Nadu 59.

59. Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of KeralaBijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala 60.

60. Express Newspapers v. Union Express Newspapers v. Union of India of India and in Bennett Coleman v. Union of Iand in Bennett Coleman v. Union of Indiandia 61.

(6)

62.

62. Rajendram v. State of MadrasRajendram v. State of Madras 63.

63. State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali SarkarState of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar 64.

64. Northern India Caterers Ltd. v. State of Punjab Northern India Caterers Ltd. v. State of Punjab 65.

65. Ameernnisa Begum v. Mehboob BegumAmeernnisa Begum v. Mehboob Begum 66.

66. Ram Prasad v. State of BiharRam Prasad v. State of Bihar 67.

67. E P Royappa v. State of Tamil NaduE P Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu 68.

68. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of IndiaManeka Gandhi v. Union of India 69.

69. Mithu v. State of PunjabMithu v. State of Punjab 70.

70. Central Inland Water Corporation v. B N GangulCentral Inland Water Corporation v. B N Gangulyy 71.

71. DTC v. DTC Mazdoor CongressDTC v. DTC Mazdoor Congress 72.

72. Common Cause v. Union of IndiaCommon Cause v. Union of India 73.

73. Shivsagar Tiwari v. Union of IndiaShivsagar Tiwari v. Union of India 74.

74. Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of DelhiFrancis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi 75.

75. Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association v. Union of IndiaSupreme Court Advocates on Record Association v. Union of India 76.

76. In re, Presidential ReferenceIn re, Presidential Reference 77.

77. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad caseT.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad case 78.

78. ; R D Shetty v. International Airport Authority; R D Shetty v. International Airport Authority 79.

79. Ajay Hasia v. Khalid MujibAjay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib 80.

80. A L Kalra v. Project &Equipment CoA L Kalra v. Project &Equipment Corporationrporation 81.

81. Sunil Batra v. Delhi AdministrationSunil Batra v. Delhi Administration 82.

82. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal CorporationOlga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation 83.

83. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of IndiaBandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India 84.

84. onsumer Education & Research Centre v. Union of Indiaonsumer Education & Research Centre v. Union of India 85.

85. Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra ChakrabortyBodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty 86.

86. Munn v. IllinoisMunn v. Illinois 87.

87. Parmanand Kataria v. Union of IndiaParmanand Kataria v. Union of India 88.

88. Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West BengalPaschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West Bengal 89.

89. Unni Krishnan v. State ofUnni Krishnan v. State of 90.

90. Indian Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of IndiaIndian Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India 91.

91. M C Mehta v. Union of IndiaM C Mehta v. Union of India 92.

(7)

93.

93. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India 94.

94. Gauri Shankar v. Union of IndiaGauri Shankar v. Union of India 95.

95. A P Pollution Control Board II v. M V A P Pollution Control Board II v. M V NayuduNayudu 96.

96. Govind v. State of MPGovind v. State of MP 97.

97. R Raj Gopal v. State of R Raj Gopal v. State of Tamil NaduTamil Nadu 98.

98. PUCL v. Union of IndiaPUCL v. Union of India 99.

99. „X‟ v. Hospital Z„X‟ v. Hospital Z 100.

100. M H Hoskot v. State of MaharashtraM H Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra 101.

101. Hussainara Khatoon v. State of BiharHussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar 102.

102. Khatri v. State of BiharKhatri v. State of Bihar 103.

103. Suk Das v. Union Territory of Arunachal PradeshSuk Das v. Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh 104.

104. Hussainara Khatoon (I) to (VI) v Home Secretary, BiharHussainara Khatoon (I) to (VI) v Home Secretary, Bihar 105.

105. Kadra Pahadiya v. State oKadra Pahadiya v. State of Biharf Bihar 106.

106. Common Cause v. Union of IndiaCommon Cause v. Union of India 107.

107. Rajdeo Sharma v. State of Rajdeo Sharma v. State of BiharBihar 108.

108. Prem Shankar v. Delhi AdministrationPrem Shankar v. Delhi Administration 109.

109. Munna v. State of UPMunna v. State of UP 110.

110. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. ESICKirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. ESIC 111.

111. Rudul Sah v. State of BiharRudul Sah v. State of Bihar 112.

112. Bhim Singh v. State of J & Bhim Singh v. State of J & KK 113.

113. Nilabati Behra v. State of Orissa Nilabati Behra v. State of Orissa 114.

114. Mithu v. State PunjabMithu v. State Punjab 115.

(8)

Introduction

Where the law is subject to some other authority and has none of its own, the collapse of the Where the law is subject to some other authority and has none of its own, the collapse of the state, in my

state, in my view, is not view, is not far off; but far off; but if law is if law is the master of the the master of the government and government and the government the government isis its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods shower on a state”.

shower on a state”.

-- Plato Plato

Dicey said Dicey said11::

““ It It means, in means, in the the first place, first place, the the absolute supremacy absolute supremacy or or predominance predominance of of regular law regular law asas opposed to the influence of arbitrary power, and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, opposed to the influence of arbitrary power, and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogative, or even of wide discretionary authority on the part of the government. of prerogative, or even of wide discretionary authority on the part of the government. Englishmen are

Englishmen are ruled by ruled by the lawthe law, and , and by the by the law alone; law alone; a a man may man may with uwith us be s be punishedpunished for

for a a breach breach of of law, law, but but he he can can be be punished punished for for nothing nothing else. else. It It means, means, again, again, equalityequality before the law, or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law courts; the „ before the law, or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law courts; the „ rulerule

of law‟

of law‟ in this sense excludes the idea of any exemption of officials or others from the in this sense excludes the idea of any exemption of officials or others from the duty of obedience to the law which governs other citizens or from the jurisdiction of the duty of obedience to the law which governs other citizens or from the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals; there can be with us nothing really corresponding to the ordinary tribunals; there can be with us nothing really corresponding to the

„administrative law‟

„administrative law‟ (droit administratif) or the „administrative tribunals‟ (tribunaux(droit administratif) or the „administrative tribunals‟ (tribunaux

administratifs)

administratifs) of France. The notion which lies at the bottom of the „administrative law‟of France. The notion which lies at the bottom of the „administrative law‟ known to foreign countries is, that affairs or disputes in which the Government or its known to foreign countries is, that affairs or disputes in which the Government or its servants are

servants are concerned concerned are are beyond beyond the the sphere sphere of of the the civil civil courts and courts and must be must be dealt dealt withwith by special and more or less official bodies. This idea is utterly unknown to the law of by special and more or less official bodies. This idea is utterly unknown to the law of England, and indeed is fundamentally inconsistent with our traditions and customs.” England, and indeed is fundamentally inconsistent with our traditions and customs.” According to

According to DiceyDicey, the, the Rule of LawRule of Law, as he formulated it, was a principle of the English, as he formulated it, was a principle of the English Constitution. The preface to the first edition says that the book

Constitution. The preface to the first edition says that the book “deals with only two or three“deals with only two or three guiding principles which

guiding principles which pervade the modern pervade the modern Constitution of England,Constitution of England,” and the book shows” and the book shows thatthat the Rule of Law is one such principle. This is important, for the modern version of that rule does the Rule of Law is one such principle. This is important, for the modern version of that rule does

1 1

A.V. Dicey,

(9)

not assert that it is a principle of the English Constitution, but that the rule is an ideal by not assert that it is a principle of the English Constitution, but that the rule is an ideal by reference to which that Constitution must be judged.

reference to which that Constitution must be judged.

Rule of Law

Rule of Law is the basic necessity for maintaining peace in the country. Constitution is supreme is the basic necessity for maintaining peace in the country. Constitution is supreme law of the nation and it is all about politics and as we know politics is all about unpredictability. law of the nation and it is all about politics and as we know politics is all about unpredictability. So in this assignment, I am concerned on the problems which cause threat to the Rule of Law in So in this assignment, I am concerned on the problems which cause threat to the Rule of Law in the society. And what can be done to maintain this Rule in the society for proper functioning of the society. And what can be done to maintain this Rule in the society for proper functioning of the legislature

the legislature

India is the largest democratic country in the world. It attained freedom 67 years ago, has a India is the largest democratic country in the world. It attained freedom 67 years ago, has a thriving institutions like Parliament, State Assemblies and Panchayat. Our constitution is written thriving institutions like Parliament, State Assemblies and Panchayat. Our constitution is written in such a manner that everyone would get equal opportunity. Our nation has three organs, in such a manner that everyone would get equal opportunity. Our nation has three organs, namely,

namely, executiveexecutive,, judiciary judiciary and and legislativelegislative. All the three are been bestowed with independent. All the three are been bestowed with independent and autonomous powers to make and implement the rules depending on the changing society so and autonomous powers to make and implement the rules depending on the changing society so that the nation can run smoothly.

that the nation can run smoothly.

By exercising the power of adult franchise the common people choose their leaders. The leaders By exercising the power of adult franchise the common people choose their leaders. The leaders have vision, shape our future and

have vision, shape our future and implement people‟s programmes. But this is not theimplement people‟s programmes. But this is not the truth. truth.

We see stark reality of destitution, malnutrition, illiteracy, joblessness in the independent India. We see stark reality of destitution, malnutrition, illiteracy, joblessness in the independent India. Roughly, 15% of people are well off, economically. They are industrial tycoons, financial Roughly, 15% of people are well off, economically. They are industrial tycoons, financial conglomerates, politicians, and their touts, media and intelligentsia are in the rich layer and conglomerates, politicians, and their touts, media and intelligentsia are in the rich layer and ruthlessly exploiting the rest of us. The majority are living without prop

ruthlessly exploiting the rest of us. The majority are living without prop er housing, education ander housing, education and healthcare.

healthcare.

Politicians, criminals and police have forged an unholy nexus. As the scams keep multiplying, Politicians, criminals and police have forged an unholy nexus. As the scams keep multiplying, we, the common people feel shame. The exploitation by leaders who have been mandated to we, the common people feel shame. The exploitation by leaders who have been mandated to conserve, develop and protect the citizen at large is disgusting.

conserve, develop and protect the citizen at large is disgusting.Coffingate Coffingate was bribe taken by the was bribe taken by the defence ministry to bury the martyrs of the

defence ministry to bury the martyrs of the Kargil Kargil wawar r .. BofBof ors gun backpaors gun backpay y scandal was alleged scandal was alleged in premiership of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi.

in premiership of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi. Tehelka Tehelka exposed bribes taken by exposed bribes taken by MM r. Bangaru lr. Bangaru l axmaaxman,n, BJ

BJ P National PrP National Pr eessident ident . The involvement of Army in the. The involvement of Army in the AAdarsh Hdarsh H ousinousing Sg Society eociety episode pisode isis damage to our most revered institution. Even the air force and navy personals are deeply damage to our most revered institution. Even the air force and navy personals are deeply involved. Another skeleton has popped of the cupboard, in the form of

involved. Another skeleton has popped of the cupboard, in the form of2G spe2G spectructru m m , causing a, causing a loss of Rs. 1, 80,000 crore to the national exchequer. The undervaluation of Public Sector Unit loss of Rs. 1, 80,000 crore to the national exchequer. The undervaluation of Public Sector Unit

(10)

disinvestment also has been under investigation. A failed public distribution system (PDS) and disinvestment also has been under investigation. A failed public distribution system (PDS) and the

the Union Union FF ooood & d & AgriculturAgricultur e Mine Min isisteter r MM r. Sr. Sharad Pharad Pawawar ar got reprimanded by the Honorable got reprimanded by the Honorable Supreme Court when food grains went rotting instead of reaching the starving millions. The Supreme Court when food grains went rotting instead of reaching the starving millions. The politicians of

politicians of Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh were siphoning were siphoning food food grains to grains to offshore countries offshore countries to mint to mint money formoney for themselves, instead of feeding their countrymen and women. The bribes

themselves, instead of feeding their countrymen and women. The bribes – – for- loan scam hasfor- loan scam has exposed leading Banks and LIC Housing Fund.

exposed leading Banks and LIC Housing Fund.

Economic inequality has to be fought on the political plane. The Bihar Assembly election of Economic inequality has to be fought on the political plane. The Bihar Assembly election of 2010 has given a new dimension to the nation. The landslide victory for the agenda of 2010 has given a new dimension to the nation. The landslide victory for the agenda of development put forth by Mr. Nitish is phenomenal, and has dealt a big blow the caste ridden, development put forth by Mr. Nitish is phenomenal, and has dealt a big blow the caste ridden, divisive, feudalistic and parochial policies of the

divisive, feudalistic and parochial policies of the other leaders.other leaders. The concept of

The concept of Rule oRule of lf l aw aw 2 2 is of old origin and is an ancient ideal. It was discussed by ancient is of old origin and is an ancient ideal. It was discussed by ancient Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle around 350 BC. Plato wrote:

Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle around 350 BC. Plato wrote: “Where the law is“Where the law is subject to

subject to some other some other authority authority and has and has none of none of its own, its own, the collapse the collapse of the of the state, in state, in my view, my view, isis not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the situation

situation is is full full of of promise promise and and men men enjoy enjoy all all the the blessings blessings that that the the gods gods shower shower on on a a stastate”.te”. Likewise, Aristotle also endorsed the concept of Rule of law by writing that

Likewise, Aristotle also endorsed the concept of Rule of law by writing that "law should govern"law should govern and those in powers should be

and those in powers should be servants of the laws.”servants of the laws.” The phrase

The phrase „Rule of Law‟ „Rule of Law‟ is derived from the French phrase is derived from the French phrase „la principe de legalite‟ „la principe de legalite‟ ((thethe principle

principle of of legalitylegality) which refers to a government based on principles of law and not of men.) which refers to a government based on principles of law and not of men. Rule of law is one of the basic principles of the English Constitution and the doctrine is accepted Rule of law is one of the basic principles of the English Constitution and the doctrine is accepted in the Constitution of U.S.A and India as well. The entire basis of

in the Constitution of U.S.A and India as well. The entire basis of Administrative Administrative LawLaw is the is the doctrine of the rule of law.

doctrine of the rule of law.

The Rule of Law, in its most basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. The rule The Rule of Law, in its most basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. The rule follows logically from the idea that truth, and therefore law, is based upon fundamental follows logically from the idea that truth, and therefore law, is based upon fundamental principles which can be discovered, but which cannot be created through an act of will.

principles which can be discovered, but which cannot be created through an act of will.

2 2

H.M. Seervai,

H.M. Seervai, “The Supreme Court of India and the Shadow of Dicey”“The Supreme Court of India and the Shadow of Dicey” in inThe Position of the Judiciary under theThe Position of the Judiciary under the Constitution of India

(11)

In fact, the Supreme Court has declared the rule of law to be one of the

In fact, the Supreme Court has declared the rule of law to be one of the 'basic features' 'basic features' of the of the Constitution.

Constitution.33 S

Sir ir Edward Coke Edward Coke , the Chief Justice of King James I‟s reign was the, the Chief Justice of King James I‟s reign was the originator of this concept.originator of this concept. He maintained that the King should be under God and the Law and he established the supremacy He maintained that the King should be under God and the Law and he established the supremacy of the law against the executive and that there is nothing higher than law.

of the law against the executive and that there is nothing higher than law. Later,

Later, AlAl bebert rt VeVenn nn DiDi cecey y 4 4 developed the concept in his book developed the concept in his book „The Law of the Constitution‟ „The Law of the Constitution‟ 5 5 .. His writing on the British Constitution (which is unwritten) included three distinct though His writing on the British Constitution (which is unwritten) included three distinct though kindered ideas on Rule of law:

kindered ideas on Rule of law: 1.

1. AbseAbsence once of f discretiondiscretion ary powers ary powers and suprand supr eemacy of Lmacy of L aw: aw: viz. no man is above law. No viz. no man is above law. No man is punishable except for a distinct breach of law established in an ordinary legal man is punishable except for a distinct breach of law established in an ordinary legal manner before ordinary courts. The government cannot punish any one merely by its own manner before ordinary courts. The government cannot punish any one merely by its own fiat. Persons in authority do not enjoy wide, arbitrary or discretionary powers. Dicey fiat. Persons in authority do not enjoy wide, arbitrary or discretionary powers. Dicey asserted that wherever there is discretion there is room for arbitrariness.

asserted that wherever there is discretion there is room for arbitrariness. 2.

2. Equality before law: Equality before law: Every man, whatever his rank or condition, is subject to the Every man, whatever his rank or condition, is subject to the ordinary law and jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. No person should be made to suffer ordinary law and jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. No person should be made to suffer in body or deprived of his property except for a breach of law established in the ordinary in body or deprived of his property except for a breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts of the land.

legal manner before the ordinary courts of the land. 3.

3. Predominance of legal spirit: Predominance of legal spirit: The general principles of the British Constitution, The general principles of the British Constitution, especially the liberties and the rights of the people must come from traditions and especially the liberties and the rights of the people must come from traditions and customs of the people and be recognized by the courts in administration of justice from customs of the people and be recognized by the courts in administration of justice from time to time.

time to time. The expression

The expression„rule of law‟ „rule of law‟ is one which, over the years, has been used to convey a wide variety is one which, over the years, has been used to convey a wide variety of ideas and has a number of meanings and corollaries including their criticisms. In common of ideas and has a number of meanings and corollaries including their criticisms. In common parlance it is often used simply to describe the state of affairs in a country where, in the main, the parlance it is often used simply to describe the state of affairs in a country where, in the main, the

law is observed and order is kept

law is observed and order is kept – – i.e., as an expression synonymous with i.e., as an expression synonymous with „law and order‟ „law and order‟ . To. To public

public lawyers, lawyers, however, however, the the phrase phrase conveys conveys something something a a little little more more precise. precise. For For them, them, thethe phrase is inextricably linked with the writings of Dic

phrase is inextricably linked with the writings of Dicey.ey.

3 3

Indira Nehru Gandhi v Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 2

Indira Nehru Gandhi v Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 2 295; SP Gupta v Union of 295; SP Gupta v Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149India, AIR 1982 SC 149

4 4

A British jurist and constitutional theorist A British jurist and constitutional theorist

5 5

(1885) (1885)

(12)

The term

The term „rule of law‟ „rule of law‟ is not used in the Indian Constitution anywhere, but there is no doubt that is not used in the Indian Constitution anywhere, but there is no doubt that the rule of law pervades the Constitution as an underlying principle. In fact, the Supreme Court the rule of law pervades the Constitution as an underlying principle. In fact, the Supreme Court has declared the rule of law to be one of the „basic features‟ of the Constitution, so this principle has declared the rule of law to be one of the „basic features‟ of the Constitution, so this principle cannot be taken away even by a constitutional amendment. In this assignment I will try to focus cannot be taken away even by a constitutional amendment. In this assignment I will try to focus on the Indian conception of the rule of law is both formal and substantive. It is also seen as an on the Indian conception of the rule of law is both formal and substantive. It is also seen as an integral part of good governance.

integral part of good governance. The

The SState otate of f MM .P..P. vv.. BhBh arat Sarat Sinin gh gh 6 6 also did not raise any questionalso did not raise any question about Dicey‟sabout Dicey‟s Rule of Law,Rule of Law, though it did raise a question about the Rule of Law in the strict legal sense. In

though it did raise a question about the Rule of Law in the strict legal sense. In BhBh arat Sarat Sinin ghgh case, it was contended that as the executive power of the State was co-extensive with its case, it was contended that as the executive power of the State was co-extensive with its legislative power, an executive order restricting the movements of a citizen could be passed legislative power, an executive order restricting the movements of a citizen could be passed without the authority of any law, and the Supreme Court‟s decision in

without the authority of any law, and the Supreme Court‟s decision in Ram JawayRam Jawaya Kapura Kapur vv..

Sta

State ote of f PunjPunj ab ab 7 7 was relied upon to support the contention. The Supreme Court could have was relied upon to support the contention. The Supreme Court could have pointed out,

pointed out, but did but did not, that not, that the principle the principle ofofKapurKapur case directly negatived the contention whencase directly negatived the contention when that case held that though the authority of law was not necessary for Government to carry on that case held that though the authority of law was not necessary for Government to carry on trade, such authority

trade, such authority waswas necessary when it became necessary to encroach upon private rights in necessary when it became necessary to encroach upon private rights in order to carry on trade. The Supreme Court distinguished

order to carry on trade. The Supreme Court distinguished KapurKapur case on the ground that itcase on the ground that it involved no action prejudicial to the rights of others. Even so,

involved no action prejudicial to the rights of others. Even so, BhBh arat Sarat Sinin ghgh case is reallycase is really disposed of by the

disposed of by the court‟s observation thatcourt‟s observation that “every act done by the Government or b“every act done by the Government or b y its y its officersofficers must, if it is to operate to the prejudice of any person be supported by some legislative must, if it is to operate to the prejudice of any person be supported by some legislative authority,”

authority,” for that is the strict legal meaning of the Rule of Law. For reasons which I have for that is the strict legal meaning of the Rule of Law. For reasons which I have already given, it was wholly unnecessary to refer to the first meaning which Dicey gave to the already given, it was wholly unnecessary to refer to the first meaning which Dicey gave to the Rule of Law, or to

Rule of Law, or to Dicey‟s contrast between the English and the Continental systems.Dicey‟s contrast between the English and the Continental systems. The Supreme Court observed in

The Supreme Court observed in Som Raj Som Raj v.v. SState tate of Hof H aryana aryana that the absence of arbitrary that the absence of arbitrary power

power is is the the primary primary postulate postulate of of Rule Rule of of Law Law upon upon which which the the whole whole constitutional constitutional edifice edifice isis dependent. Discretion being exercised without any rule is a concept which is antithesis of the dependent. Discretion being exercised without any rule is a concept which is antithesis of the concept. concept. 6 6 [AIR 1967 SC 1170] [AIR 1967 SC 1170] 7 7 (1955) 2 SCR 225 (1955) 2 SCR 225

(13)

Rule of Law under the Indian Constitution

In India, the concept of Rule of law can be traced back to the Upanishads. In modern day as well, In India, the concept of Rule of law can be traced back to the Upanishads. In modern day as well, the scheme of the Indian Constitution is based upon the concept of rule of law. The framers of the scheme of the Indian Constitution is based upon the concept of rule of law. The framers of the Constitution were well familiar with the postulates of rule of law as propounded by Dicey the Constitution were well familiar with the postulates of rule of law as propounded by Dicey and as modified in its application to

and as modified in its application to British India. It was therefore, in the fitness of things that theBritish India. It was therefore, in the fitness of things that the founding fathers of the Constitution gave due recognition to the concept of rule of law.

founding fathers of the Constitution gave due recognition to the concept of rule of law.

The doctrine of Rule of Law as enunciated by Dicey has been adopted and very succinctly The doctrine of Rule of Law as enunciated by Dicey has been adopted and very succinctly incorporated in the Indian Constitution. The ideals of the Constitution viz; justice, liberty and incorporated in the Indian Constitution. The ideals of the Constitution viz; justice, liberty and equality are enshrined in the Preamble itself (which

equality are enshrined in the Preamble itself (which is part of the Constitution).is part of the Constitution).

The Constitution of India has been made the supreme law of the country and other laws are The Constitution of India has been made the supreme law of the country and other laws are required to be in conformity with it. Any law which is found in violation of any provision of the required to be in conformity with it. Any law which is found in violation of any provision of the Constitution, particularly, the fundamental rights, is declared void. The Indian Constitution also Constitution, particularly, the fundamental rights, is declared void. The Indian Constitution also incorporates the principle of equality before law and equal protection of laws enumerated by incorporates the principle of equality before law and equal protection of laws enumerated by Dicey under Article 14.

Dicey under Article 14.

Constitution of India: Article 14

Constitution of India: Article 14:-:- ““Equality before lawEquality before law – – The State shall not deny to anyThe State shall not deny to any person equality before law or equal protection of laws within the territory of India

person equality before law or equal protection of laws within the territory of India.”.”

The very basic human right to life and personal liberty has also been enshrined under Article 21. The very basic human right to life and personal liberty has also been enshrined under Article 21. Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the third principle of the Rule of law Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the third principle of the Rule of law (( freedom freedom of of speech speech and and ExpressionExpression). No person can be convicted of any offence except for). No person can be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence is also violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence is also very well recognized in the Indian Constitution. The principles of double jeopardy and very well recognized in the Indian Constitution. The principles of double jeopardy and self-incrimination also found its rightful place in the Constitution. Articles 14, 19 and 21 are so basic incrimination also found its rightful place in the Constitution. Articles 14, 19 and 21 are so basic that they are also called the

that they are also called the golden triangle Articles of the Indian Constitution.golden triangle Articles of the Indian Constitution.

The Constitution also ensures an independent an impartial Judiciary to settle disputes and The Constitution also ensures an independent an impartial Judiciary to settle disputes and grievances for violation of fundamental rights by virtue of Articles 32 and 226. In

grievances for violation of fundamental rights by virtue of Articles 32 and 226. In UniUni on oon off India

India v.v. PresPresident, Mident, M adras Bar adras Bar AssAssociation ociation 8 8 , the Supreme Court held that, the Supreme Court held that “Rule of Law has“Rule of Law has several

several facets, facets, one one of of which which is is that that disputes disputes of of citizens citizens will will be be decided decided by by Judges Judges who who areare

8 8

CIVIL APPEAL NO.3067 OF 2004 CIVIL APPEAL NO.3067 OF 2004

(14)

independent and impartial; and that disputes as to legality of acts of the Government will be independent and impartial; and that disputes as to legality of acts of the Government will be decided by Judges who are independent of the Executive.”

decided by Judges who are independent of the Executive.” Ju

Ju sstiti ce ce R.SR.S. Pathak. Pathak of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has observed thatof the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has observed that “It must be remembered“It must be remembered that our entire constitutional system is founded on the rule of law, and in any system so designed that our entire constitutional system is founded on the rule of law, and in any system so designed it is impossible to conceive of legitimate power which is arbitrary in character and travels it is impossible to conceive of legitimate power which is arbitrary in character and travels beyond the bounds of reason.”

beyond the bounds of reason.” In

In MM ahabir Prahabir Pr asasad ad SaSantosh ntosh KuKu marmar v.v. State State of of U.P.,U.P., the District Magistrate had cancelled thethe District Magistrate had cancelled the license granted under the U.P. Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1962 without giving any reason license granted under the U.P. Sugar Dealers Licensing Order, 1962 without giving any reason and the State Government had dismissed the appeal against the said order of the District and the State Government had dismissed the appeal against the said order of the District Magistrate without recording the reasons. This Court has held:

Magistrate without recording the reasons. This Court has held: “The practice of the executive“The practice of the executive authority dismissing statutory appeals against orders which prima facie seriously prejudice the authority dismissing statutory appeals against orders which prima facie seriously prejudice the rights of the aggrieved party without giving reasons is a negation of the rule of law.

rights of the aggrieved party without giving reasons is a negation of the rule of law.”” “Recording of

“Recording of reasons in support of a decision on a disputed claim by a quasi- judicialreasons in support of a decision on a disputed claim by a quasi- judicial authority ensures that the decision is reached according to law and is not the result of authority ensures that the decision is reached according to law and is not the result of caprice, whim or fancy or reached on grounds of policy or expediency. A party to the caprice, whim or fancy or reached on grounds of policy or expediency. A party to the dispute is ordinarily entitled to know the grounds on which the authority has rejected his dispute is ordinarily entitled to know the grounds on which the authority has rejected his claim. If the order is subject to appeal, the necessity to record reasons is greater, for claim. If the order is subject to appeal, the necessity to record reasons is greater, for without recorded reasons the appellate authority has no material on which it may without recorded reasons the appellate authority has no material on which it may determine whether the facts were properly ascertained, the relevant law was correctly determine whether the facts were properly ascertained, the relevant law was correctly applied and the decision was just.”

applied and the decision was just.” In

In S.P. Gupta case S.P. Gupta case , the petitioners had raised the question of alleged misuse of power of, the petitioners had raised the question of alleged misuse of power of appointing and transferring the Judges of the High Court by the Government. In order to make appointing and transferring the Judges of the High Court by the Government. In order to make sure that the power of appointment of Judges was not used with political motives thereby sure that the power of appointment of Judges was not used with political motives thereby undermining the independence of the judiciary, the petitioners sought information as to whether undermining the independence of the judiciary, the petitioners sought information as to whether the procedures laid down under Articles 124(2) and 217(1) had been scrupulously followed. Here the procedures laid down under Articles 124(2) and 217(1) had been scrupulously followed. Here the right to information was a condition precedent to the rule of law. Most of the issues, which the right to information was a condition precedent to the rule of law. Most of the issues, which the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan of Rajasthan had raised in their mass struggle for the right the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan of Rajasthan had raised in their mass struggle for the right to information, were mundane matters regarding wages and employment of workers, such to information, were mundane matters regarding wages and employment of workers, such information was necessary for ensuring that no discrimination had been made between workers information was necessary for ensuring that no discrimination had been made between workers

(15)

and that everything had been done according to law. The right to information is thus embedded and that everything had been done according to law. The right to information is thus embedded in Articles 14, 19(1) (a) and 21

in Articles 14, 19(1) (a) and 21 of the Constitution.of the Constitution. In

In Maganlal Chhaganlal‟s cas Maganlal Chhaganlal‟s casee, a Bench of seven learned Judges of this Court considered, inter, a Bench of seven learned Judges of this Court considered, inter alia, the question: whether a judgment of the Supreme Court in

alia, the question: whether a judgment of the Supreme Court in Northern Northern India India Caterers‟ Caterers‟ casecase

was required to be overruled. Khanna, J. observed: was required to be overruled. Khanna, J. observed:

“At the same time, it has to be borne in mind that certainty and continui

“At the same time, it has to be borne in mind that certainty and continuity are essentialty are essential ingredients of rule of law. Certainty in law would be considerably eroded and suffer a serious ingredients of rule of law. Certainty in law would be considerably eroded and suffer a serious setback if the highest court of the land readily overrules the view expressed by it in earlier cases, setback if the highest court of the land readily overrules the view expressed by it in earlier cases, even though that view has held the field for a number of years. In quite a number of cases which even though that view has held the field for a number of years. In quite a number of cases which come up before this Court, two views are possible, and simply because the Court considers that come up before this Court, two views are possible, and simply because the Court considers that the view not taken by the Court in the earlier case was a better view of the matter would not the view not taken by the Court in the earlier case was a better view of the matter would not justify the

justify the overruling of overruling of the view. the view. The law The law laid dolaid down by wn by this Court this Court is binding is binding upon all upon all courts incourts in the country under Article 141 of the Constitution, and numerous cases all over the country are the country under Article 141 of the Constitution, and numerous cases all over the country are decided in accordance with the view taken by this Court. Many people arrange their affairs and decided in accordance with the view taken by this Court. Many people arrange their affairs and large number of transactions also take place on the faith of the correctness of the view taken by large number of transactions also take place on the faith of the correctness of the view taken by this Court. It would create uncertainty, instability and confusion if the law propounded by this this Court. It would create uncertainty, instability and confusion if the law propounded by this Court on the basis of which numerous cases have been decided and many transactions have taken Court on the basis of which numerous cases have been decided and many transactions have taken place is held to be not the correct law.”

place is held to be not the correct law.”

The rule of law highlights the independence of the judiciary and the supremacy of courts. It is The rule of law highlights the independence of the judiciary and the supremacy of courts. It is rightly reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case

rightly reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case Union oUnion of If I ndia ndia v. v. RagRaghubir hubir SSinin gh gh that it is that it is not a matter of doubt that a considerable degree that governs the lives of the people and regulates not a matter of doubt that a considerable degree that governs the lives of the people and regulates the State functions flows from the decision of the superior courts.

the State functions flows from the decision of the superior courts. In

In ChiChi eef f sseettlttl eemement nt CommisCommisssionion eer r PunjPunj ab ab v.v. Om PrakOm Prak asash h , it was observed by the supreme , it was observed by the supreme court that,

court that, “In our constitutional system, the central and most characteristic feature is the“In our constitutional system, the central and most characteristic feature is the concept of rule of law which means, in the present context, the authority of law courts to test all concept of rule of law which means, in the present context, the authority of law courts to test all administrative action by the standard of legality. The administrative or executive action that administrative action by the standard of legality. The administrative or executive action that does not meet the standard will be set aside if the aggrieved person brings the matter into does not meet the standard will be set aside if the aggrieved person brings the matter into notice.”

notice.”

In India, the meaning of rule of law has been much expanded. It is regarded as a part of the basic In India, the meaning of rule of law has been much expanded. It is regarded as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution and, therefore, it cannot be abrogated or destroyed even by structure of the Constitution and, therefore, it cannot be abrogated or destroyed even by

(16)

Parliament. The ideals of constitution; liberty, equality and fraternity have been enshrined in the Parliament. The ideals of constitution; liberty, equality and fraternity have been enshrined in the preamble.

preamble. Constitution Constitution makes makes the the supreme supreme law law of of the the land land and and every every law law enacted enacted should should be be inin conformity to it. Any violation makes the law u

conformity to it. Any violation makes the law ultra vires.ltra vires. In the case of

In the case of BinBin ani Zinc Liani Zinc Li mitemitedd v.v. Kerala State Kerala State ElEl eectrictri city Board and Ors city Board and Ors 9 9 ..,, JuJu sstiti ce ce S BS B sinha

sinha declare thatdeclare that “It is now a well settled principle of law that t “It is now a well settled principle of law that t he rule of law inter aliahe rule of law inter alia postulates that all laws would be prospective subject of course to enactment an express provision postulates that all laws would be prospective subject of course to enactment an express provision

or intendment to the contrary.”

or intendment to the contrary.” In the case of In the case of Gadakh YaGadakh Yasshwantrhwantr ao ao KankKank arrarr ao ao v.v. BalasahebBalasaheb Vik

Vik he Phe Patil atil the ratio laid down was the ratio laid down was “If the“If the rule of law has to be preserved as the essence of the rule of law has to be preserved as the essence of the democracy of which purity of elections is a necessary concomitant, it is the duty of the courts to democracy of which purity of elections is a necessary concomitant, it is the duty of the courts to appreciate the evidence and construe the law in a manner which would subserve this higher appreciate the evidence and construe the law in a manner which would subserve this higher purpose

purpose and and not not even even imperceptibly imperceptibly facilitate facilitate acceptance, acceptance, much much less less affirmance, affirmance, of of the the fallingfalling electoral standards. For democracy to survive, rule of law must prevail, and it is necessary that electoral standards. For democracy to survive, rule of law must prevail, and it is necessary that the best available men should be chosen as people's representatives for proper governance of the the best available men should be chosen as people's representatives for proper governance of the country. This can be best achieved through men of high moral and ethical values who win the country. This can be best achieved through men of high moral and ethical values who win the elections on a positive vote obtained on their own merit and not by the negative vote of process elections on a positive vote obtained on their own merit and not by the negative vote of process of elimination based on comparative demerits

of elimination based on comparative demerits of the candidates.”of the candidates.” In the case of

In the case of SukhdevSukhdevvv. Bh. Bh agagatram,atram, Mathew J.Mathew J. declared that declared that “Whatever be the concept of the“Whatever be the concept of the rule of law, whether it be the meaning given by Dicey in his

rule of law, whether it be the meaning given by Dicey in his "" The Law oThe Law of the Cf the Consonstitutitituti on" on" oror the definition given by

the definition given by HH ayeayekk in hisin his "" RoaRoad to Sd to Seerfrf domdom" " and and "" CoConsnstitution of titution of libeliberty" rty" or the or the exposition set-forth by

exposition set-forth by HH arrarr y y JonesJonesin hisin his "" ThTh e e RulRul e e of Lof L aw aaw and the Wend the Welflf are Sare Statetate" " , , there is,there is, as pointed out by

as pointed out by MM atheathew, J.w, J. , , in in his his article article onon "" The WeThe Welflf are Sare Statetate, Rule o, Rule of Lf L aw aaw and Naturnd Natur alal Justice"

Justice" inin "" DemoDemocraccracy, Equality y, Equality and Fand F reereedodom,m," "substantial agreement is in juristic thought" "substantial agreement is in juristic thought that the great purpose of the rule of law notion is the protection of the individual against that the great purpose of the rule of law notion is the protection of the individual against arbitrary exercise of power, wherever it is found". It is indeed unthinkable that in a democracy arbitrary exercise of power, wherever it is found". It is indeed unthinkable that in a democracy governed

governed by by the the rule rule of of law law the the executive executive Government Government or or any any of of its its officers officers should should possesspossess arbitrary power over the interests of the individual. Every action of the executive Government arbitrary power over the interests of the individual. Every action of the executive Government must be informed with reason and should be free from arbitrariness. That is the very essence of must be informed with reason and should be free from arbitrariness. That is the very essence of the rule of law and its bare minimal requirement. And to the application of this principle it the rule of law and its bare minimal requirement. And to the application of this principle it

9 9

(2009) (2009)

(17)

makes no difference whether the exercise of the power involves affection of some right or denial makes no difference whether the exercise of the power involves affection of some right or denial of some privilege."

of some privilege." In

In SeSecretarcretary, Sy, State of Kartate of Kar nataknatak a and Ora and Or ss.. v.v. Umadevi and OrUmadevi and Or ss,, a Constitution Bench of thisa Constitution Bench of this Court has laid down the law in

Court has laid down the law in the following terms:the following terms:

“Thus, it is clear that adherence to the rule of equality in public employment is a basic feature of “Thus, it is clear that adherence to the rule of equality in public employment is a basic feature of our Constitution and since the rule of law is the core of our Constitution, a court would certainly our Constitution and since the rule of law is the core of our Constitution, a court would certainly be disabled from passing an order upholding a violation of Article 14 or in ordering the be disabled from passing an order upholding a violation of Article 14 or in ordering the overlooking of the need to comply with the requirements of Article 14 read with Article 16 of the overlooking of the need to comply with the requirements of Article 14 read with Article 16 of the Constitution.”

Constitution.” In the case of

In the case of AmlAml an Jyoan Jyoti Bti B orooaorooah h v. v. State State of of AssAssam and Oram and Or s s . It was held by. It was held by S S B SinhB Sinh a a that: that: “Equity must not be equated with compassion. Equitable principles must emanate from facts “Equity must not be equated with compassion. Equitable principles must emanate from facts which by themselves are unusual and peculiar. A balance has to be struck and the Court must be which by themselves are unusual and peculiar. A balance has to be struck and the Court must be cautious to ensure that its endeavour to do equity does not amount to judicial benevolence or cautious to ensure that its endeavour to do equity does not amount to judicial benevolence or acquiescence of established violation of fundamental rights and the principles of Rule of law.” acquiescence of established violation of fundamental rights and the principles of Rule of law.” Moreover, In the case of

Moreover, In the case of Bachan Singh Bachan Singh v.v. sstate tate of of PunPun jab jab ,, Justice BhagwatiJustice Bhagwati has emphasized has emphasized that rule of law excludes arbitrariness and unreasonableness. To ensure this, he has suggested that rule of law excludes arbitrariness and unreasonableness. To ensure this, he has suggested that it is necessary to have a democratic legislature to make laws, but its power should not be that it is necessary to have a democratic legislature to make laws, but its power should not be unfettered, and that there should be an independent judiciary to protect the citizens against the unfettered, and that there should be an independent judiciary to protect the citizens against the excesses of executive and legislative power. In addition to this in

excesses of executive and legislative power. In addition to this in P. P. ssambamurambamur ththyy v.v. state ostate off An

An dhrdhr a Pradea Pradessh h , the SC has declared a provision authorizing the executive to interfere with, the SC has declared a provision authorizing the executive to interfere with tribunal justice as unconstitutional characterizing it as

tribunal justice as unconstitutional characterizing it as “violative of the rule of law which is“violative of the rule of law which is clearly a basic and essential feature of the constitution”

clearly a basic and essential feature of the constitution” Yet another case is of

Yet another case is of YusYusuf Kuf K han han v. v. MM anohar Josanohar Joshi hi in which the SC laid down the proposition in which the SC laid down the proposition that it is the duty of the state to preserve and protect the law and the constitution and that it that it is the duty of the state to preserve and protect the law and the constitution and that it cannot permit any violent act which may negate the rule of law.

cannot permit any violent act which may negate the rule of law.

Hence, it is quite evident that the concept of rule of law is gaining importance and attention and Hence, it is quite evident that the concept of rule of law is gaining importance and attention and judicial efforts are made to make it stronger.

(18)

The opposite of rule of law is rule of person. The rule of law is necessarily rule by men, for the The opposite of rule of law is rule of person. The rule of law is necessarily rule by men, for the law is inert. Men are necessary to enforce the law, but all men are prone to interpret the law law is inert. Men are necessary to enforce the law, but all men are prone to interpret the law through their own knowledge, interpretation, and ethical sense. At best a set of laws are a through their own knowledge, interpretation, and ethical sense. At best a set of laws are a well-intended guidebook for the application of justice by the rule of men. In spite of an apparently intended guidebook for the application of justice by the rule of men. In spite of an apparently enviable position of the subjects in almost all the fields of industry, commerce, education, enviable position of the subjects in almost all the fields of industry, commerce, education, transport, banking, insurance etc. there is interference by the administrative authorities with the transport, banking, insurance etc. there is interference by the administrative authorities with the actions of the individuals, companies and other corporate and non-corporate bodies, observes actions of the individuals, companies and other corporate and non-corporate bodies, observes

Justice Ramaswamy

Justice Ramaswamy. There is a large amount of discretion involved in the administrative work.. There is a large amount of discretion involved in the administrative work. For e.g.: for the purpose of national planning the executive is armed with vast powers in respect For e.g.: for the purpose of national planning the executive is armed with vast powers in respect of land ceiling, control of basic industries, taxation, mobilization of labour etc. Even Parliament of land ceiling, control of basic industries, taxation, mobilization of labour etc. Even Parliament passes

passes acts acts which which are are opposed opposed to to personal personal liberty liberty such such as as preventive preventive detention detention act act oror maintenance of Internal Security act 1971, national security act 1980. Even the simplest thing maintenance of Internal Security act 1971, national security act 1980. Even the simplest thing like discriminate payment of employees can be termed as inequality, as opposed to rule of law. like discriminate payment of employees can be termed as inequality, as opposed to rule of law. The case

The case Frank Anthony Employees‟ UnionFrank Anthony Employees‟ Unionv.v. Union of IUnion of I ndiandiais concerned with discriminationis concerned with discrimination in payment to employees, which was held to violate the person‟s right to equality and in payment to employees, which was held to violate the person‟s right to equality and unreasonable classification of pensioners was held to be arbitrary in the case

unreasonable classification of pensioners was held to be arbitrary in the caseNakara Nakara v. v. UniUni on oon off India

India ..

In the present scenario where disinvestment of the public sector is in full swing and the private In the present scenario where disinvestment of the public sector is in full swing and the private enterprises are stepping into the zone of public sector, there is a responsibility upon the private enterprises are stepping into the zone of public sector, there is a responsibility upon the private enterprise to maintain the rule of law in their conduct. Reference may be made to the dissenting enterprise to maintain the rule of law in their conduct. Reference may be made to the dissenting view of

view of S.B.Sinha JS.B.Sinha J. in. inZeZee e TelifTelif ilil ms ms v. v. Union oUnion of If I ndia ndia , where he points that in the new market, where he points that in the new market economy we need to change the definition of State under article 12 of the Constitution. The economy we need to change the definition of State under article 12 of the Constitution. The private

private bodies bodies have have assumed assumed quasi-public quasi-public dimension dimension and and the the state state intervention intervention is is decreasingdecreasing every day.

every day.

Criminal process and rule of law: it would amoun

Criminal process and rule of law: it would amount to rule of law:t to rule of law: When there is certainty of rule of law. “

When there is certainty of rule of law. “The rule of law means that decisions should be made byThe rule of law means that decisions should be made by the application of known principles and rules in general, such decisions should be predictable the application of known principles and rules in general, such decisions should be predictable

(19)

and the citizens should know where he is. A decision without any principle or rule is un and the citizens should know where he is. A decision without any principle or rule is un predictable and is the a

predictable and is the antithesis of a decision in accordance with ntithesis of a decision in accordance with the rule of law”the rule of law”1010 In

In C. RC. Ravichandravichandr an Ian I yeyer r v v.. J.A.MJ.A.M . Bh. Bh attaattacharyacharya,,11 11 the court observed that that the rule of lawthe court observed that that the rule of law and judicial review are the basic features of the constitution as its integral constitutional and judicial review are the basic features of the constitution as its integral constitutional structure. Independence of judiciary is an essential attribute of rule of law. If there is one structure. Independence of judiciary is an essential attribute of rule of law. If there is one principle which runs through

principle which runs through the entire fabric of the entire fabric of the constitution, it ithe constitution, it i s the principle of s the principle of rule of lawrule of law and under the constitution it is the judiciary which is entrusted with the task of keeping every and under the constitution it is the judiciary which is entrusted with the task of keeping every organ of the state within the limits of law, thereby making rule of law more meaningful and organ of the state within the limits of law, thereby making rule of law more meaningful and effective.

effective.

The Supreme Court, in

The Supreme Court, in In re In re Vinay ChandrVinay Chandra Mishra‟s a Mishra‟s casecase12 12 stated that stated that “the rule of law is the“the rule of law is the foundation of

foundation of a democratic a democratic society. The society. The judiciary is judiciary is the guardian the guardian of rule of rule of law. of law. In a In a democracydemocracy like ours where there is written constitution which is above all individuals and institutions and like ours where there is written constitution which is above all individuals and institutions and where the power of judicial review is vested in the superior court, the judiciary has a special and where the power of judicial review is vested in the superior court, the judiciary has a special and additional duty to perform i.e. to see that all the individual and institutions including the additional duty to perform i.e. to see that all the individual and institutions including the executive and legislative act within the framework of not only law but also the fundamental law executive and legislative act within the framework of not only law but also the fundamental law of the land.

of the land.”” In

In DDTC TC v.v. MM azazdoor Congrdoor Congr eesss s 13 13 , the Supreme Court held that uncannalised discretion vested in, the Supreme Court held that uncannalised discretion vested in the administrative authority is not

the administrative authority is not permissible.permissible. In

In A.K. Kraipak A.K. Kraipak v. v. Union oUnion of If I ndia ndia 14 14 , the court held that the concept of rule of law would lose its, the court held that the concept of rule of law would lose its validity if the instrumentalities of the state are not charged with the duty of discharging their validity if the instrumentalities of the state are not charged with the duty of discharging their functions in a fair and just manner. The court further stated that the aim of natural justice is to functions in a fair and just manner. The court further stated that the aim of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively, prevent miscarriage of justice. They do not supplant the law secure justice or to put it negatively, prevent miscarriage of justice. They do not supplant the law of the land but supplement it. The horizon of natural justice is constantly expanding ant it covers of the land but supplement it. The horizon of natural justice is constantly expanding ant it covers not only quasi-judicial but also administrative powers.

not only quasi-judicial but also administrative powers.

10 10 (AIR 1967 SC 1427) (AIR 1967 SC 1427) 11 11 (1995) 5 SCC 457 (1995) 5 SCC 457 12 12 (1996) 2 SCC 584 (1996) 2 SCC 584 13 13 AIR 1991 SC 101 AIR 1991 SC 101 14 14 AIR 1970 SC 150 AIR 1970 SC 150

Rule of Law in Indian Constitution (Autosaved)