SUBRATA ACHARJEE AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

SUBRATA ACHARJEE AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

The transient nature of Article 332(3B) and the legislative intent for seat reservation do not violate any constitutional mandate. Parliament is empowered by Articles 82 and 170 to make such temporary provisions for social and political goals; proportionality need not be exact.

Parties
Petitioner: Subrata Acharjee and Ors.; Respondent: Union of India; Respondent: State of Tripura
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Reservation, Scheduled Tribes, Legislative Assembly, Amendment, Proportional Representation
Constitutional Law Reservation Scheduled Tribes Legislative Assembly Amendment Proportional Representation

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Subrata Acharjee and Ors.

Petitioner

Union of India

Respondent

State of Tripura

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Constitutional validity of the Constitution (72nd Amendment) Act, 1992
  2. 2 Validity of reservation of seats for Scheduled Tribes in the Tripura Legislative Assembly based on number of existing members rather than population proportion

Ratio Decidendi

The transient nature of Article 332(3B) and the legislative intent for seat reservation do not violate any constitutional mandate. Parliament is empowered by Articles 82 and 170 to make such temporary provisions for social and political goals; proportionality need not be exact.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed.

Orders

  • Petition dismissed without any order as to costs.