M.KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, C.J. - (1.) THESE writ petitions as Public Interest Litigation have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for striking down the various Constitutional Amendment Acts, (i) Constitution (Eight Amendment) Act, 1959, (ii) Constitution (Twenty Third Amendment) Act, 1969, (iii) Constitution (Forty Fifth Amendment) Act, 1980, (iv) Constitution (Sixty Second Amendment) Act, 1989 and (v) Constitution (Seventy Ninth Amendment) Act, 1999, as ultra vires of the original Article 334 of the Constitution of India as well as Articles 330, 331, 332 and 333 of the Constitution of India as ultra vires of the basic structure of the Constitution of India.
(2.) THE main ground on the basis of which prayer has been made is as follows: (A) These constitutional amendments are framing reservations for the last 60 years, whereby promoting fissiparous tendencies among the citizens of India. The continuation of reservation in the matter of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has deprived the citizens of unreserved categories from offering themselves as candidates in the election of Parliament and State Legislatures and other representative bodies in the reserved constituencies for the last 60 years and therefore, they are deprived from exercising their democratic and fundamental rights. (B) The impugned amendments are without authority of law. Further the impugned amendments are in vacuum. Through these amendments, the Parliament is misleading the people of India for the last 60 years from the commencement of the Constitution and in the grab of upliftment of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe, alienating the basic human inalienable rights from these people of unreserved categories. The Parliament has utterly discarded the basic human rights of the people belonging to unreserved categories living in reserved constituencies in the territory of India. The Parliament has subverted and undermined the Democratic Republic Ideals in sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic republic Bharat to the people of India belonging to unreserved categories living in reserved constituencies and these people cannot file nomination from the reserved constituencies, they cannot enjoy liberty of thought and expression freely and according to their own choice, while exercising their fundamental rights. Their fundamental rights for the last 60 years have been restricted as these people cannot take part in the governance of the country from the reserved constituencies. (C) The other articles providing for reservation of seats in the case of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Municipal Elections, State Legislatures and Parliament be declared as ultra vires of the basic structure of the Constitution, being opposed to the democratic system of the Government, to the feeling, of fraternity, to a sense of unity and integrity of the Nation and in violation of the command of the founding fathers enshrined in the original Article 334 of the Constitution. The command of the founding fathers, while introducing Article 334, is that the provision of reservation in the matter of representation should be only for 10 years and thereafter this provision shall cease to have effect after 10 years from the commencement of the Constitution. The further extension after 10 years is utter violation of the command of the founding fathers enshrined in the original Article 334 of the Constitution of India. On the above points, elaborate arguments have been advanced by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners. He cited (2007) 2 SCC 9,I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRS v. State of T.N. and : AIR1973SC1461 , Keshavanand Bharti and Ors. v. State of Kerala. Learned Counsel representing the State, while refuting the arguments advanced by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, would cite : AIR1973Ori136 , Basudev Khadanga v. Union of India and Ors. and , Vichitra Banwarilal Meena v. Union of India and Ors. and contend that various amendments upto 45th Amendment providing for reservation beyond the period of 10 years had been challenged on the very same ground and both the Rajasthan High Court as well as Orissa High Court, on the basis of the Supreme Court judgments, held that those amendments are not ultra vires to the Constitution and as such, the conclusion and finding arrived at by the above High Courts on the basis of the ratio decided by the Supreme Court would apply to these cases also and therefore, these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.
(3.) WE have carefully considered the respective submissions of the learned senior counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel representing the State.;