KUNWAR SHRI VIR RAJENDRA SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

KUNWAR SHRI VIR RAJENDRA SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Recognition of Rulership by the President under Article 366(22) is an exercise of political power and does not confer any right to private property; such recognition does not infringe fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(f) or 31, nor is it justiciable, as disputes arising from covenants and recognition are barred from judicial interference under Article 363.

Parties
Petitioner/appellant: Rajendra Singh; Respondent No. 1: Union of India; Respondent No. 3: Hemant Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 September 1969
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition No. 190 of 1966 and Civil Appeal No. 1949 of 1966 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition and appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Recognition of Rulers, Private Property Rights, Succession, Fundamental Rights
Constitutional Law Recognition of Rulers Private Property Rights Succession Fundamental Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rajendra Singh

Petitioner/appellant

Union of India

Respondent No. 1

Hemant Singh

Respondent No. 3

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition No. 190 of 1966 and Civil Appeal No. 1949 of 1966 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is recognition of a Ruler by the President under Article 366(22) also recognition of right to private property?
  2. 2 Does executive action in recognizing a Ruler infringe Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 (right to property)?
  3. 3 Is the power to recognize a Ruler an arbitrary and unguided power open to challenge?

Ratio Decidendi

Recognition of Rulership by the President under Article 366(22) is an exercise of political power and does not confer any right to private property; such recognition does not infringe fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(f) or 31, nor is it justiciable, as disputes arising from covenants and recognition are barred from judicial interference under Article 363.

Court Disposition

Petition and appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Petition under Article 32 and appeal dismissed with one set of costs.