P. Sambamurthy & ors. etc vs State of Andhra Pradesh || 1987 AIR 663

P. Sambamurthy vs State of Andhra Pradesh

FACTS

There were several writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of clause (5) of Article 371-D of the constitution introduced via the Constitution (Thirty-Second Amendment) Act 1973. Clause (3) empowered the president to make administrative tribunals for the state of Andhra Pradesh. The order will become effective only on confirmation by the state government on expiry of three months. Under the proviso it was also empowered to modify or annul an order of the tribunal. Such a control by the state government was challenged before the Hon'ble Court. ISSUES

Whether clause (5) of article 371-D violative of basic structure of Indian Constitution LAWS INVOLVED

1. Basic Structure doctrine

2. Rule of Law

3. Article 368

4. Article 371 (D)

5. Constitutional Amendment Act 1973 JUDGEMENT

The Supreme Court allowed the writs and declared clause (5) of Article 371-D along with the Proviso to be unconstitutional and void. Allowing such a provision to exist which empowers the State Government to modify or annul an order of administrative tribunal would lead to a violation of the Rule of Law which is a basic feature of the Indian constitution. Therefore, the impugned provision is henceforth void and against the scheme of the Indian constitution.