Rules Made To Exercise Powers And Privileges Of State Legislature Constitute Law Within The Meaning Of Article 13: Supreme Court

  • Post category:Daily Judgments
  • Reading time:4 mins read

Rules Made To Exercise Powers And Privileges Of State Legislature Constitute Law Within The Meaning Of Article 13

Case: Ashish Shelar vs Maharashtra Legislative Assembly

Coram: Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar

Case No.: WPC 797 OF 2021

Court Observation: “The Rules framed by the Legislative Assembly under Article 208 of the Constitution is the procedure established by law for the purpose of Article 21 of the Constitution.”

“It is settled law that even rules made to exercise the powers and privileges of State Legislature constitute law within the meaning of Article 13. This is exposited in Special Reference No.1 of 1964 . It is held that when the State Legislatures purport to exercise this power, they will undoubtedly be acting under Article 246 read with Entry 39 of List II. The enactment of such a law will, therefore, have to be treated as a law within the meaning of Article 13. In the backdrop of these observations, the plea taken by the State that the rules are neither statutory rules nor binding on the House will be of no avail.”

“At the same time, proceedings inside the Legislature cannot be called into question on the ground that the same have not been carried on in accordance with the rules of business as restated in Kihota Hollohon . It is, however, enough for the present to observe that the rules framed under Article 208 acquire the status of procedure established by law for the purpose of Article 21 of the Constitution as noticed in M.S.M. Sharma. This observation has been quoted with approval by another Constitution Bench again in Raja Ram Pal”

Previous Posts

State Cannot Dictate What Decisions Can Or Cannot Be Taken By A Public Trust: Supreme Court

High Courts With Original Civil Jurisdiction Can Also Execute Foreign Decrees Under Section 44A of CPC: Supreme Court

Reservation In Promotion- Supreme Court Declares That Its Judgment In M. Nagaraj Shall Have Only Prospective Effect

Sanction U/S 197 CrPC Required To Prosecute Public Servants If Alleged Act Committed Is Directly Concerned With Official Duty: Supreme Court

Advocates Have Right To Practice Before Maintenance Tribunals: Delhi HC Declares S.17 Of Senior Citizens Act Ultra Vires To S.30 Advocate Act

Trial Judges Work Amidst Appalling Conditions; Colonial Mindset Towards District Judiciary Must Change: Supreme Court Download Judgement