RAMESHWAR PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(SC)-2006-1-54
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on January 24,2006

RAMESHWAR PRASAD Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT V. COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
DIMES V. GRAND JUNCTION CANAL [REFERRED TO]
FRANKLIN V. MINISTER OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING [REFERRED TO]
LIVERSIDGE V. ANDERSON [REFERRED TO]
DEFRENNE V. SABENAM [REFERRED TO]
MALAYSIA STEPHEN KALONG NINGKAN V. GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA [REFERRED TO]
C.C.S.U. V. MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE [REFERRED TO]
CIVIL SERVICE UNIONS V. MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE [REFERRED TO]
CIVIL SERVICES UNION V. MINISTER OF CIVIL SERVICE [REFERRED TO]
RICHARD NIXON V. ERNEST FITZGERALD [REFERRED TO]
VAMUZO V. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
MUHAMMAD SHARIF V. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN [REFERRED TO]
PUHLHOFER V. HILLINGDON,LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
R. V. LANCASHIRE CC,EXP. HUDDLESTON [REFERRED TO]
VAKUTA V. KELLY [REFERRED TO]
R. V. SECY,OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPTT. EX P. BRIND [REFERRED TO]
S.R.BOMMAIAND ORS. V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
ATTORNEY GENERAL V. GUARDIAN NEWSPAPERS LTD. (NO. 2) [REFERRED TO]
R. V. LORD SAVILLE EXP. [REFERRED TO]
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA V.SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY FOOTBALL UNION [REFERRED TO]
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT V. COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
R. V. GOUGH [REFERRED TO]
R. V. BOW STREET METROPOLITAN STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATE,EXP. PINOCHET UGARTE [REFERRED TO]
INCIDENTALLY IN LOCABAIL [LOCABAIL (U.K.) LTD. V. BAYFIELD PROPERTIES LTD. [REFERRED TO]
R. V. SECY,OF STATE FOR HOME DEPTT.,EXP. SIMMS [REFERRED TO]
G.D.KARKARE V. T.L.SHEVDE [REFERRED TO]
JAYANTILAL AMRATLAL SHODHAN VS. F N RANA [REFERRED TO]
BRUNDABAN NAYAK VS. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BARIUM CHEMICALS LIMITED VS. COMPANY LAW BOARD [REFERRED TO]
S PARTHASARATHI VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
M A RASHEED VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATE OF PUNJAB VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HARGOVIND PANT VS. RAGHUKUL TILAK [REFERRED TO]
SHALINI SONI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
MARU RAM BHIMWA RAM SHANKER KRISHNA RAGHUBIR SINGH RAMPUJA SINGH NIRBHAI SINGH BALKRISHAN GUPTA VENY SINGH BABULAL GAUTAM OM PRAKASH NAGEBHUSHANAM PATNAIK RAGHUNATH SINGH JAGIR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHCHANDRA KACHARDAS PORWAL NARAYANDAS GOVINDDAS SHA MOTEEJEE VIRCHANDJI PRAVINCHANDRA KESHAVLAL M V MANJUNATH APPASAHEB BHARAMAPPA VANKUNDRE BASUDEO PRASAD BHAGWAN DAS G VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
R K GARG R K KARANJIA MADHU MEHTA P K SOI S S BEDI VS. UNION OF INDIA :UNION OF INDIA :UNION OF INDIA :UNION OF INDIA :UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
A K ROY THAN SINGH TYAGI DR VASANTKUMAR PANDIT VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI BASU VS. DEBI GHOSAL [REFERRED TO]
KEHAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S R BOMMAI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA VS. SUBRAMANIAM SWAMY [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. G GANAYUTHAM [REFERRED TO]
KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED VS. GIRJA SHANKAR PANT [REFERRED TO]
OM KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. V K KHANNA [REFERRED TO]
B R KAPUR VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
PEOPLES UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ABHUPINDER SHARMA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
CLARIANT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED VS. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD [REFERRED TO]
UDAI NARAIN SINHA VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
BIMAN CHANDRA BOSE VS. H C MUKHERJEE GOVERNOR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. SALLENDRA NATH BOSE [REFERRED TO]
K K ABOO VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
K A MATHIALAGAN VS. GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. KAWAS MANEKSHAW NANAVATI [REFERRED TO]
PRATAPSING RAOJIRAO RANE VS. GOVERNOR OF GOA [REFERRED TO]
EMPEROR VS. BENOARI LAL SARMA [REFERRED TO]
BHAGAT SINGH VS. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

SHRIRAM GANPATRAO YAWALE VS. RESIDENT DEPUTY COLLECTOR AMRAVATI [LAWS(BOM)-2006-12-151] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL BANSAL VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(MPH)-2008-3-25] [REFERRED TO]
CHITRA M PRAKASHKER VS. STATE OF GUJRAT [LAWS(GJH)-2008-1-6] [REFERRED TO]
VARUN ALIAS SANJU DIPAKBHAI VYAS VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2013-7-621] [REFERRED TO]
MERAGBHAI KANABHIA CHAVDA AND ORS. VS. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. [LAWS(GJH)-2016-4-28] [REFERRED TO]
T.K.S. ELANGOVAN VS. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, FORT ST. GEORGE CHENNAI [LAWS(MAD)-2016-12-100] [REFERRED TO]
POONAM KHATTAR VS. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2009-7-159] [REFERRED TO]
KALAM DIN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(J&K)-2014-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
JAMES HOTELS LTD VS. UNION TERRITORY [LAWS(P&H)-2009-2-79] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. JAI DEV [LAWS(P&H)-2012-1-17] [REFERRED TO]
S. RAMACHANDRAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2023-9-78] [REFERRED TO]
MD. ABDUL KHALIQUE VS. THE STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(MANIP)-2016-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
SIKKANDER VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2021-12-136] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2006-12-122] [REFERRED]
KANHU ALIAS KANHER GOUDA VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2008-2-7] [REFERRED TO]
KJS AHLUWALIA VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2020-12-35] [REFERRED TO]
ROYNATH D SANGMA VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(GAU)-2010-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
ABHIMANYU RATHOR VS. STATE OF H.P. & OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2017-12-212] [REFERRED TO]
VEERESWARA SPINNING MILLS P LTD VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2010-7-195] [REFERRED TO]
B.S. YEDDYURAPPA VS. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR KARNATAKA AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2015-11-252] [REFERRED TO]
MR. ULHAS T. NAIK, ADVOCATE PRACTICING IN HIGH COURT VS. THE HONBLE PRESIDENT OF INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-2018-2-340] [REFERRED TO]
SHRIKANT SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2013-1-90] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRABHAI CHANABHAI KANDOLIYA VS. VAKATAR BHAGVANJIBHAI DEVABHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2011-7-202] [REFERRED TO]
JAVAID AHMAD AKHOON VS. UNION TERRITORY OF JK [LAWS(J&K)-2022-12-19] [REFERRED TO]
SAROJ YADAV VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2017-7-11] [REFERRED TO]
ANU RADHA VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2009-7-279] [REFERRED]
NACHHATAR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2011-6-20] [REFERRED TO]
JAGADEEP PRATAP DEO VS. HON?BLE GOVERNOR OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2023-3-24] [REFERRED TO]
BALJINDER PAL KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2008-7-171] [REFERRED]
JASWANT SINGH GURJAR VS. HONBLE SPEAKER RAJASTHAN VIDHANSABHA JAIPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-2010-8-6] [REFERRED TO]
HARISH CHANDRA SINGH RAWAT VS. UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER [LAWS(UTN)-2016-4-51] [REFERRED]
JASWANT SINGH GURJAR VS. HONBLE SPEAKER RAJASTHAN VIDHANSABHA [LAWS(RAJ)-2010-9-1] [REFERRED TO]
S NALINI W/O SRIHARAN VS. GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-7-221] [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2024-2-27] [REFERRED TO]
PUKHREM SHARATCHANDRA SINGH VS. MAIREMBAM PRITHVIRAJ @ PRITHIBIRAJ SINGH [LAWS(SC)-2015-10-2] [REFERRED TO]
SARDAR GURU DAYAL SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2007-7-22] [REFERRED TO]
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. AJMER SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2011-1-227] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV RAJ SINGH SIDHU VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS [LAWS(P&H)-2010-11-772] [REFERRED]
SEM INDIA FAB (P) LTD VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(TLNG)-2023-3-63] [REFERRED TO]
R.S.KUREEL VS. CHANCELLOR DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR [LAWS(MPH)-2018-2-160] [REFERRED TO]
SHRAWAN KUMAR BANSAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CA)-2012-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA NATH DAS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2012-1-7] [REFERRED TO]
S RAMULU S/O S CHANDRAIAH VS. STATE OF TELANGANA, REP BY ITS PRL SECRETARTY, PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT ,SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2018-8-11] [REFERRED TO]
P S MANOHAR NAIDU VS. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION [LAWS(APH)-2006-6-108] [REFERRED TO]
JYOTSNA KORA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2010-8-60] [REFERRED TO]
HARCHARAN SINGH VS. PUNJAB SCHOOL EDUCATION BOARD & ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2007-3-481] [REFERRED]
EX CONSTABLE JAGBIR SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2006-7-494] [REFERRED TO]
THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS NO.45 E AND 220 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA VS. M. HAKEEM [LAWS(SC)-2021-7-20] [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH DESAI VS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2023-5-47] [REFERRED TO]
RAJKOT DISTT. COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(SC)-2014-11-72] [REFERRED TO]
JAYRAJBHAI JAYANTIBHAI PATEL VS. ANILBHAI JAYANTIBHAI PATEL [LAWS(SC)-2006-9-42] [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY DYEING AND MFG CO LTD VS. BOMBAY ENVIRONMENT ACTION GROUP [LAWS(SC)-2006-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
P.C. GEORGE MLA VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-11-8] [REFERRED TO]
S.C. SHARMA VS. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH, CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-2011-5-92] [REFERRED TO]
KHADEEJA NARGEES VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-8-593] [REFERRED TO]
DEO KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2017-7-78] [REFERRED TO]
RATAN SOLI LUTH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2021-8-81] [REFERRED TO]
RASHIDULLAH KHAN AND ORS. VS. GOVERNMENT OF NCT DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2015-11-181] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION [LAWS(DLH)-2012-7-159] [REFERRED TO]
DIPAKBHAI MOHANBHAI PATEL VS. A S PATEL OR HIS SUCCESSOR IN THE OFFICE [LAWS(GJH)-2009-3-87] [REFERRED TO]
PURSHOTTAM SOLANKI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2012-9-124] [REFERRED TO]
N SEKHAR VS. GOVT OF A P [LAWS(APH)-2006-6-147] [REFERRED]
S.K. MEHROTRA VS. LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-42] [REFERRED TO]
VITACHU MLA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2008-3-2] [REFERRED TO]
HIPAVADI VILLAGE PANCHAYAT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 [LAWS(GJH)-2015-12-251] [REFERRED]
CITIZENS FOR DEMOCRACY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2015-1-98] [REFERRED TO]
SWAROOP YADAV VS. RAKESH KUMAR YADAV [LAWS(MPH)-2018-10-149] [REFERRED TO]
RAJA RAM PAL VS. SPEAKER LOK SABHA [LAWS(SC)-2007-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
SOMESH TIWARI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2006-9-38] [REFERRED TO]
LAL CHAND VS. STATE BANK OF PATIALA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-3-996] [REFERRED]
NERSWN BORO VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2020-7-13] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI K SIPPE GOWDA VS. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKARESENTED [LAWS(KAR)-2006-5-2] [REFERRED TO]
LATIPLANG KHARKONGOR VS. SECRETARIAT OF THE GOVERNOR OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(MEGH)-2020-1-7] [REFERRED TO]
SALINI V.S VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2021-12-268] [REFERRED TO]
LALIT KUMAR MODI VS. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-2010-9-141] [REFERRED TO]
HARISH CHANDRA SINGH RAWAT VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(UTN)-2016-3-4] [REFERRED TO]
SHANTI SWAROOP VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2008-8-197] [REFERRED]
GURDEV SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2006-8-334] [REFERRED]
B P SINGHAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2010-5-38] [REFERRED TO]
PARENTS ASSOCIATION FOR THE MEDICAL DENTAL STUDENTS VS. R J SHAH FEE COMMITEE [LAWS(GJH)-2008-3-162] [REFERRED TO]
RAMA PRASAD SARKAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2022-2-38] [REFERRED TO]
PROFESSOR UDAYA KUMAR VS. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY, [LAWS(DLH)-2020-9-59] [REFERRED TO]
TAJ MOHD. VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(J&K)-2014-5-23] [REFERRED TO]
V. VENKATESWAR RAO VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2012-10-20] [REFERRED TO]
ALPHONSE A SANGMA VS. ROYNATH D SANGMA [LAWS(GAU)-2011-1-50] [REFERRED TO]
AMIT ROSHAN SURYAVANSHI VS. STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-7-483] [REFERRED TO]
JAGESHWAR DAYAL TIWARI VS. NEELESH TIWARI & ANR. [LAWS(MPH)-2017-8-41] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAWATI GRAM PANCHAYAT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2018-4-44] [REFERRED TO]
UDAYA KUMAR VS. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY [LAWS(DLH)-2020-9-190] [REFERRED TO]
MAHANAGAR GHAZIABAD CHETNA MUNCH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-12-31] [REFERRED TO]
MANJIT SINGH VS. MAHARASHTRA ASSEMBLY [LAWS(BOM)-2006-7-60] [REFERRED TO]
DHEERAJ MESHRAM VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2012-7-34] [REFERRED TO]
DAU DAYAL SHARMA VS. STATE OF U P AND ANOTHER [LAWS(ALL)-2017-3-321] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV CHARAN VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2008-8-198] [REFERRED]
M J THOMAL VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2007-10-26] [REFERRED TO]
MS. ANINDITA & ANR. VS. PRANAB KUMAR MUKHERJEE & ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2017-1-119] [REFERRED TO]
KUNHALI VS. TAHSILDAR [LAWS(KER)-2021-1-117] [REFERRED TO]
SOOPPY NARIKKATTERI VS. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION [LAWS(KER)-2020-2-62] [REFERRED TO]
J&K S.R.T.C. VS. MOHAMMAD RAMZAN GABROO [LAWS(J&K)-2012-10-17] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVAM ENTERPRISES VS. FOOD CORP OF INDIA [LAWS(J&K)-2010-12-9] [REFERRED]
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER VS. MANOHAR PARRIKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2011-11-54] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN KUMAR SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2010-5-459] [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. R C MEENA [LAWS(P&H)-2010-8-143] [REFERRED TO]
M. RAJ SEKHAR, S/O. SRI M.YADAIAH VS. THE STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2020-8-25] [REFERRED TO]
TUSHARBHAI HARJIBHAI GHELANI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2018-12-29] [REFERRED TO]
NEW DELHI TELEVISION LIMITED VS. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA FOREIGN EXCHANGE DEPARTMENT [LAWS(BOM)-2018-6-149] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA ESTATE PVT LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2010-9-120] [REFERRED TO]
SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY VS. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY [LAWS(DLH)-2012-1-299] [REFERRED TO]
JANHIT MANCH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2006-11-58] [REFERRED TO]
HIREN @ BANTI DASHRATHBHAI PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 [LAWS(GJH)-2013-7-602] [REFERRED TO]
AZAD VIKRAM SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2016-7-91] [REFERRED]
ISAK EBINESAR VS. CHAIRMAN CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS NEW DELHI [LAWS(MAD)-2009-4-539] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.A.MEHTA [LAWS(SC)-2013-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
NABAM REBIA VS. REGISTRAR GENERAL, GAUHATI HIGH COURT AND ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2016-2-94] [REFERRED TO]
SI SURINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2008-7-176] [REFERRED]
THRIPURALA SURESH VS. THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND ORS. [LAWS(TLNG)-2020-8-27] [REFERRED TO]
OMBIR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-4-444] [REFERRED]
ANIL DALAL VS. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(P&H)-2010-10-195] [REFERRED TO]
JATAN KUMAR THAOSEN VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2007-4-28] [REFERRED TO]
PEMA KHANDU AND ORS. VS. NABAM REBIA AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2016-1-19] [REFERRED TO]
IMTILEMBA SANGTAM VS. SPEAKER [LAWS(GAU)-2014-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD AHIRWAR VS. STATE OF M P AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-7-124] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH SINGH YADAV VS. STATE OF M.P. AND ANOTHER [LAWS(MPH)-2017-1-101] [REFERRED TO]
KURIAKOSE VS. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE [LAWS(KER)-2020-3-651] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Y.K.SABHARWAL, CJI. - (1.)(For himself and on behalf of B.N.Agrawal and Ashok Bhan, JJ.)
(2.)THE challenge in these petitions is to the constitutional validity of Notification dated 23rd May, 2005 ordering dissolution of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Bihar. It is a unique case. Earlier cases that came up before this Court were those where the dissolutions of Assemblies were ordered on the ground that the parties in power had lost the confidence of the House. THE present case is of its own kind where before even the first meeting of the Legislative Assembly, its dissolution has been ordered on the ground that attempts are being made to cobble a majority by illegal means and lay claim to form the Government in the State and if these attempts continue, it would amount to tampering with constitutional provisions.
One of the questions of far reaching consequence that arises is whether the dissolution of Assembly under Article 356(1) of the Constitution of India can be ordered to prevent the staking of claim by a political party on the ground that the majority has been obtained by illegal means. We would first note the circumstances which led to the issue of impugned notification. Factual Background

Election to the State of Bihar was notified by the Election Commission on 17th December, 2004. Polling for the said elections were held in three phases, i.e., 3rd February, 2005, 5th February, 2005 and 13th February, 2005. Counting of votes took place on 27th February, 2005. Results of the said elections were declared by the Election Commission. On 4th March, 2005, Notification was issued by the Election Commission in pursuance of Section 73 of Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short 'the RP Act, 1951') duly notifying the names of the members elected for all the constituencies along with party affiliation.

(3.)BIHAR Legislative Assembly comprises of 243 members and to secure an absolute majority support of 122 Members of Legislative Assembly (in short 'MLAs'), is required. National Democratic Alliance (for short 'NDA'), a political coalition of parties comprising of the Bharatiya Janata Party (for short 'BJP') and the Janata Dal (United) (for short 'JD(U)') was the largest pre-poll combination having the support of 92 MLAs. The party-wise strength in the Assembly was as under : JUDGEMENT_494_AIR(SCW)_2006Html1.htm
Report dated 6th March, 2005 was sent by the Governor to the President, recommending newly constituted Assembly to be kept in suspended animation for the present. It reads as under : "Respected Rashtrapati Jee, The present Bihar Legislative Assembly has come to an end on 6th March, 2005. The Election Commission's notification with reference to the recent elections in regard to constitution of the new Assembly issued vide No. 308/B.R.-L.A./2005 dated 4th March 2005 and 464/Bihar-LA/2005, dated the 4th March, 2005 is enclosed (Annexure-I) (2. Based on the results that have come up, the following is the party-wise position : JUDGEMENT_494_AIR(SCW)_2006Html2.htm

3. The present C.M., Bihar, Smt. Rabri Devi met me on 28-2-2005 and submitted her resignation along with her Council of Ministers. I have accepted the same and asked her to continue till an alternative arrangement is made.

4. A delegation of members of LJP met me in the afternoon of 28-2-2005 and they submitted a letter (Annexure II) signed by Shri Ram Vilas Paswan, President of the Party, stating therein that they will neither support the RJD nor the BJP in the formation of Government. The State President of Congress Party, Shri Ram Jatan Sinha, also met in the evening of 28-2-2005.

5. The State President of BJP, Shri Gopal Narayan Singh along with supporters met me on 1-3-2005. They have submitted a letter (Annexure III) stating that apart from combined alliance strength of 92 (BJP and JD(U)) they have support of another 10 to 12 Independents. The request in the letter is not to allow the RJD to form a Government.

6. Shri Dadan Singh, State President of Samajwadi Party, has sent a letter (Annexure IV) indicating their decision not to support the RJD or NDA in the formation of the Govt. He also met me on 2-3-2005.

7. Shri Ram Naresh Ram, Leader of the CPI (ML-Lib.), Legislature Party long with 4 others met me and submitted a letter (AnnexureV) that they would not support any group in the formation of Government.

8. Shri Ram Vilas Paswan, National President of LJP, along with 15 others met me and submitted another letter (Annexure VI). They have reiterated their earlier stand.
9. The RJD met me on 5-3-2005 in the forenoon and they staked claim to form a Government indicating the support from the following parties : JUDGEMENT_494_AIR(SCW)_2006Html3.htm (Copy enclosed as Ann.VII) The RJD with the above will have only 91. They have further claimed that some of the Independent members may support the RJD. However, it has not been disclosed as to the number of Independent MLAs from whom they expect support nor their names. Even if we assume the entire Independents totalling 17 to extend support to RJD alliance, which has a combined strength of 91, the total would be 108, which is still short of the minimum requirement of 122 in a House of 243.
10. The NDA delegation led by Shri Sushil Kumar Modi, MP, met me in the evening of 5-3-2005. They have not submitted any further letter. However, they stated that apart from their pre-election alliance of 92, another 10 Independents will also support them and they further stated that they would be submitting letters separately. This has not been received so far. Even assuming that they have support of 10 Independents, their strength will be only 102, which is short of the minimum requirement of 122.

11. Six Independent MLAs met me on 5-3-2005 and submitted a letter in which they have claimed that they may be called to form a Government and they will be able to get support of others (Annexure VIII). They have not submitted any authorization letter supporting their claim.

12. I have also consulted the Legal experts and the case laws particularly the case reported in AIR 1994 SC 1918 where the Supreme Court in para 365 of the report summarised the conclusion. The relevant part is para 2, i.e., the recommendation of the Sarkaria Commission do merit serious consideration at the hands of all concerned. Sarkaria Commission in its report has said that Governor while going through the process of selection should select a leader who in his judgment is most likely to command a majority in the Assembly. The Book "Constitution of India" written by Shri V.N. Shukla (10th edition) while dealing with Article 75 and Article 164 of the Constitution of India has dealt with this subject wherein it has quoted the manner of selection by the Governor in the following words : "In normal circumstances the Governor need have no doubt as to who is the proper person to be appointed; it is leader of majority party in the Legislative Assembly, but circumstances can arise when it may be doubtful who that leader is and the Governor may have to exercise his personal judgment in selecting the C.M. Under the Constitutional scheme which envisages that a person who enjoys the confidence of the Legislature should alone be appointed as C.M." In Bommai's case referred to above in para 153, S.C. has stated with regard to the position where, I quote : "After the General Elections held, no political party or coalition of parties or group is able to secure absolute majority in the Legislative Assembly and despite the Governor's exploring the alternatives, the situation has arisen in which no political party is able to form stable Government, it would be case of completely demonstrable inability of any political party to form a stable Government commanding the confidence of the majority members of the Legislature. It would be a case of failure of constitutional machinery."

13. I explored all possibilities and from the facts stated above, I am fully satisfied that no political party or coalition of parties or groups is able to substantiate a claim of majority in the Legislative Assembly, and having explored the alternatives with all the political parties and groups and Independents MLAs, a situation has emerged in which no political party or groups appears to be able to form a Government commanding a majority in the House. Thus, it is a case of complete inability of any political party to form a stable Government commanding the confidence of the majority members. This is a case of failure of constitutional machinery.

14. I, as Governor of Bihar, am not able to form a popular Government in Bihar, because of the situation created by the election results mentioned above.

15. I, therefore, recommend that the present newly constituted Assembly be kept in suspended animation for the present, and the President of India is requested to take such appropriate action/decision, as required."



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.