the battle between parliament and supreme court over people's right.
constitutional law is a detailed descriptttion of an ongoing battle between parliament of india and supreme court over people's right. the battle goes on like this: each time parliament makes an unconstitutional law, supreme court( hence called sc) quashesh such law. each time sc quashesh a law parliament amends the constitution to suit the one sided, biased law they will pass in future.this way the actual character of constitution as it was at the time of its inception is changed drastically. many important rights of people are struck down by vote hungry selfish parliament. in the following paras i am going to show how parliament struck off many important rights of people and what is the impact of such removal.
in golak nath vs. union of india, govt. brought constitution (seventeenth) amendment act,1964 where parliament want to establish land ceiling. golaknath challenged the amendment act on the ground that it amends fundamental right which cannot be amended under art.13. sc also pass judgement in favour of golak nath. the result is that parliament brought constitution 24th amendment act, 1971 which amends art 13 and insert clause 4 which says that nothing in this art. will apply to any amendment of constitution.
now lets see what this amendment means. art. 13 says that any law passed by legislature which violates fundamental right, will be void. it could be any law. the term law under art.13 included constitution amendment act too. now after insertion of cl.4 to art.13 the term law does not include amendment act. it means nobody can challenge the constitutionality of amendment act on the ground of violation of fundamental right in future.
to put into diagram:
before 24th amedmt. after 24th amedmt.
law law
amendment act nil
act A act A
act B act B
act C act C
the effect of such an amendment is seen in keshavananda bharati case(kv). kv challeged the constitutional validity of amendment 24th to 29th on the ground of violation of fundamental right. the sc held that those amendment are valid.in that case kerala govt. brought land reform act. kv lost his land under the act .kv challege the act first on the ground that such act violates art.14, 19(1)(f), 25, 26, 31. while the case is pending the parliament brought amendment 24th to 29th. 24th amendment destroyed the fundamental right to property completely.the effect is that nobody in india has fundamental right to property anymore.
as a consequence kv amended his plea to challenge the validity of amendment 24 th to 29th on the ground that they change basic feature of constitution. but kv did not know that 24th amendment act already makes all amendments immune from attack on the ground of fundamental right under art.13. therefore kv lost the case. sc said all amendments are valid.kv lost his land too.
now lets analyze the entire events: govt. brought acts which harms people's right (land reform act in this case). people challenge those act on the ground of constitutional validity. supreme court quashes such act. govt. change constitution to make those act valid destroying people right ( right to property in this case). what it means?
it means that govt. do not make act that fit the constitution or that enhance people's right. rather it destroys people's right to fit their biased law in the constitution. each amendment in constitution destroys some of people's right. my question is; is govt. really for people, by the people? or is it for politician, by politician etc.?
this way the battle between supreme court and parliament over people's right goes on. supreme court seems to be a mere puppet in the hand of parliament. it cannot protect people. then who can protect people of india?
