A. K. ROY, ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

A. K. ROY, ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

The Supreme Court held that the President's power to issue Ordinances is legislative, not executive, and Ordinances are 'law' for the purposes of Article 21. There is no internal contradiction between Article 368(2) and Section 1(2) of the Forty-fourth Amendment Act. The power to appoint commencement dates may be vested in the executive without constituting delegation of constituent power. The validity of the constitution of Advisory Boards under Section 9 of the National Security Act must be tested under unamended Article 22(4) as Section 3 of the Forty-fourth Amendment is not yet in force. Preventive detention laws must be interpreted narrowly to protect liberty, and procedural fairness...

Parties
Petitioner: A. K. Roy; Respondent: Union of India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 December 1981
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petitions dismissed; National Security Ordinance (and Act) upheld as valid legislation; challenge rejected.
Legal Topics
Ordinance Making Power Under Article 123, Interpretation of 'law' Under Article 21, Constitution (forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, Validity of National Security Act 1980, Natural Justice in Detention Proceedings
Constitutional Law Preventive Detention Ordinance Making Power Under Article 123 Interpretation of 'law' Under Article 21 Constitution (forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 Validity of National Security Act 1980 Natural Justice in Detention Proceedings

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. K. Roy

Petitioner

Union of India

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether power conferred on executive to appoint different dates for different provisions of the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 amounts to transfer of legislative power to executive.
  2. 2 Whether an Ordinance is 'law' under Article 21.
  3. 3 Whether the President has power to issue Ordinances under Article 123.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the President's power to issue Ordinances is legislative, not executive, and Ordinances are 'law' for the purposes of Article 21. There is no internal contradiction between Article 368(2) and Section 1(2) of the Forty-fourth Amendment Act. The power to appoint commencement dates may be vested in the executive without constituting delegation of constituent power. The validity of the constitution of Advisory Boards under Section 9 of the National Security Act must be tested under unamended Article 22(4) as Section 3 of the Forty-fourth Amendment is not yet in force. Preventive detention laws must be interpreted narrowly to protect liberty, and procedural fairness...

Court Disposition

Petitions dismissed; National Security Ordinance (and Act) upheld as valid legislation; challenge rejected.

Orders

  • No writ of mandamus shall issue to the Central Government to obligate notification of Section 3 of the Forty-fourth Amendment Act.
  • The National Security Ordinance and Act are valid laws under Article 21.