constitution 

check out https://vorugantyconstitutionofindia.blogspot.com/ for more detailed coverage

1. what is constitution :  fundamental law of india-  in kehar singh v delhi, SC said constitution is the constitutive law of india

2. completed on 26 no=v 1949 - articles already in forcce due to govt of india act 1935 act - 5,6,7,8,9,60,324,,367,378,380,388,391,392,393 - date of formation - constitution day. 

3.  came into force on 26 jan 1950 - republic day of smapurna swaraj resolution of congress 

4. features of indian constitution : lengthiest written constitution , drawn from various sources; fundamental rights , DPSP, RIGID FLEXIBLE,, FEDERAL SYSTEM WITH UNITARY BIAS, PARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVERNMENT,  SUPREMACY OF JUDICIARY, RULE OF LAW, INTEGRATED INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY, FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES, ,SECULARISM, UNIVERSAL ADULT FRANCHISE, SINGLE CITIZENSHIP, EMERGENCY PROVISIONS, THREE TIER GOVERNEMENT - CENTRAL, STATE, PANCHAYAT AND MUNICIPALITY LOCAL GOVT 

5. 395 ARTICLES 22 PARTS 8 SCHEDULES IN THE BEGINNING 

6. TAKEN FROM TEN COUNTRY CONSTITUTIONS.

7. QUASI FEDERAL IN NATURE 

8. A V DICEY GAVE RULE  OF LAW CONCEPT 

9. 18 YEARS AGE TO VOTE

10. PARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVT, SINGLE CITIZENSHIP TAKEN FROM UK CONSTITUTION

11. CONSITTUENT ASSEMBLY was constituted under cabinet mission plan 1946

12. framing of constitution took over 2 years 11 months 18 days

13.  original copies of consituion wer handwritten by calligraphy and kept in  a helium filled case 

14. prem bihari narain raizada wrote it

15. GOI ACT 1935 WAS STARTING POINT OF CONSTITUTION 

16. TO Resolve conflict between article 25.2.b and 26.b. the doctrine of harmonious construction was used.

17. sexual  harassent of a owrking woman at her place of work may also be considered as the violation of articles 19.1.g. right to take up profession trade job business are affected .

18. article relevant for solving questions of repugnancy between a central law and a state law is article 254 deals with doctrine of occupied field .

19. the concept of freedom of trade and commerce is from experiece of Australia 

constitution amendment questions 

1. 300A RIGHT TO PROPERTY WAS INSERTED BY 44 AMENDMENT ACT  ] ANSWER IS IN FOOT NOTES OF BARE ACT]

2. 52nd AMENDMENT ACT 1985 FOR INSERTING ANTI DEFECTION LAW TO CONSTITUTION 10TH SCHEDULE 

3. constitutin art 12,14,19,21, , admin environmentl  law  tort  muslim law has only five case laws - have case laws 

constitution of india

1.     1.   draft ready and adopted  on 26 nov 1949

2.      2.  came into force 26 jan 1950 republic day – india declaraton of purna swaraj declaration

3.       3. now  jk448 articles  25 parts 12 schedule

4.       schedules : 12 schedules

5.    4.    first territories second emoluments third affrmations fourth rajyasabha fifth sc st area sixth north eastern tribal areas , sevent federal structure, union , state lists concurrent list , eight official languages twent two ninth land reforms first zamindari system abolished tenth disqulafications on defection , eleventh panchayat , twelth municipalities

6.       5.TEARS OF OLD PM :TERRITORIES, EMOLUMENTS, AFFIRMATIONS, RAJYA SABHA, SCHEDULED AREAS, OTHER AREAS OF NORTH EAST, FEDERAL STRUCTURE LISTS UNION STATE CONCURRENT , OFFICIAL LANGUAGES TWENTY TWO, LAND REFORMS , PANCHAYAT, MUNICIPALITY. SCHEDULES TWELVE.

7.     6.  ELEVEN SOURCE CONSTITUTIONS : AUSTRALIA, CANADA, IRELAND, JAPAN, USSR RUSSIA, UK, USA, GERMANY, SOURTH AFRICA, FRANCE, GOVT OF INDIA ACT 1935

a.       AUSTRALIA, :

b.       CANADA,: CAN I KNOW FEDS ADDRESS : CANADA, FEDERATION WITH A STRONG CENTRE, ADVISORY JURISDICTINO OF SC, RESIDUARY POWERS WITH CENTRE,  

c.        IRELAND,: ELE’S DP IS NO 1 = ELECTION OF PRESIDENT, DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES , NOMINATION OF MEMBERS TO FIRST HOUSE RAJYA SABHA,

d.        JAPAN, :

e.       USSR RUSSIA, :

f.        UK, :PARLE BISCUIT:  PARLIAMENTARY FORM, RULE OF LAW, LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE, BICAMERAL LEGISLATURE, SINGLE CITIZENSHIP, COMPTROLLER AND AIDITOR GENERAL, WRITS,

g.       USA, : PRESIDENT NEEDS FUNDS FOR REMOVAL OF PRESNT VICE PRESIDENT AND JUDGES IN USA = PRESIDENT OF INDIA - SUPREME COMMANDER OF ARMED FORCES, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, REMOVAL OF PRESIDENT SC JUDGES, PREAMBLE TO COI, VICE PRESIDENT POST, INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL REVIEW ,

h.       GERMANY, :

i.         SoUTH AFRICA,:

j.         FRANCE, :

k.       GOVT OF INDIA ACT 1935:

REGULATING ACT 1773- PITTS INDIA ACT 1784, CHARTERS ACTS 1793,1813,1833,1853 - 1857  FIRST WAR OF INDEPENDENCE - BRITISH CROWN TOOK OVER FROM EAST INDIA COMPANY -   INDIAN COUNCILS ACT 1861-1892-1903 -->  GOVT OF INDIA ACTS 1858-1919-1935 - CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1949.

8.    6.    25 PARTS : U CAN FLY DIRECTLY FROM US TO UP TO MEET CHIILD OF SHYAM AND RAM, FRUITS TASTER SWEET TO EAT , SO ONLY EAT MAGGIE AS TASTY SNACK =[ I ]union territories, [2] citizenship, [3] fundamental rights, [4] DPSP and [4a]fundamental duties, [5] union, [6] states, [7]repealed, [8] union territories, [9] panchayats, [10] municipalities,[11]  coop societies,  [12] scheduled and tribal areas, [13] relations between union and states,[14] trade and commerce within india GST, [15] services under the union and states, [16] tribunals, [17] elections, [18] special provisions relating to certain classes, [19] official languages, [20] emergency provisions, [21] miscellaneious, [22] amending the constitution, [23] temporary transitional and special provisions, [24] short title, [25] date of commencement authroritative text of coi and repeals

9.     7.   11 TO 16 PARTS : READ FROM THE START TO END PLEASE : ,[11]  coop societies,  [12] scheduled and tribal areas, [13] relations between union and states,[14] trade and commerce within india GST, [15] services under the union and states, [16] tribunals,

26.8.  india has single integrated judiciary , idependent of executive and legislaturel 

9. 9. 31 judges incl CJI

10.10.  CITIZEN, HIGH COURT JUDGE FIVE YEARS, HC ADVOCATE FOR TEN YEARS,  DISTINGUISHED JURIST - QUALIFICATION FOR SC JUDGE 

11.11. APPOINTMENT BY PRESIDENT, SELECTION BY COLLEGIUM SYSTEM, OTHER JUDGES CJI CONSULTED FOR SELECTION 

1212. COLLEGIUM ; CJI PLUS FOUR SENIOR MOST JUDGES OF SC. 

13 13. 99 AMENDMENT ACT TO REPLACE COLLEGIUM BY NATIONAL JUDICIAL COMMISSION, WITH LAW MINISTER, PM, LEADER OF OPPOSITION,  BUT WAS RULED ULTRA VIRES BY SC

  114. CJI OATH BY PRESIDENT, 

   15. TERM OF OFFICE UPTO AGE 65 YEARS. , RESIGN, IMPEACH PROVE MISCONDUCT OR  INCAPACITY, REMOVAL BY PRESIDENT ON RECOMMENDATION OF PARLIAMENT,  AFTER SC JUDGE YOU CANNOT PRACTICE. 100 LS MEMBERS OR 50 RS MEMBERS TO INITIATE REMOVAL, INVESTIGATE BY COMMITTEE INCL HC JUDGES OR SC JUDGES OR JURISTS.

   16. SC POWERS: ORIGINAL: ; WRIT, , ADVISORY,  APPEALATE, REVISORY, , COURT OF RECORD, JUDICIAL REVIEW V CONSTITUTION, 

   17. FINAL INTERPRETER OF THE CONSTITUTION 

•    18. ARTICLE 131: ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: STATE V CENTER V STATE JURISDICTION;  
•        ARTICLE 132-134: APPELLATE JUSTISDICTION SC   IS THE FINAL COURT OF APPEAL ; 
•        ARTICLE 136 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION  JURISDICTION ;
•         ARTICLE 143 ARTICLE ADVISORY JURISDICTION; JUDICIAL REVIEW JURISDICTION. 
•         ARTICLE 32:  WRIT JURISDICTION FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS JURISDICTION PROTECTOR OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ;
•         ARTICLE 137 REVISORY JURISDICTION OF ITS OWN JUDGEMENTS; 
•    ARTICLE 129 SC IS A COURT OF RECORD, IT HAS THE POWER OF CONTEMPT OF COURT 
•     ARTICLE 13 ANY LAW AGAINST FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS SHALL BE NULL AND VOID - SC POWER TO PRONOUNCE IT 

   19.  FIRST SC OF INDIA ESTABLISHED IN KOLKATA. ON REGULATING ACT 1876

• TRADE MONOPOLY ENDED CHARTERS ACT 1833
•    LORD WILLIAM BENTINCK, FIRST GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA, CHARTERS ACT 1853
•     INDIAN COUNCIL ACT 1909 MORLEY MINTO REFORMS, COMMUNAL ELECTORATE LEADING TO PARTITION. 
• GOVT OF INDIA 1919 DYARCGYM CETNTER PROVINCE GOVT, , UPPER HOUSE LOWER HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT LEGISLATURE 
• GOVT OF INDIA ACT 1935 - SKELETON OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
• IT WAS CALLED THE CHARTER OF SLAVERY 
•     WW II - CRIPPS MISSION - CABINET MISSION - INDEPENDENCE OF INDIA ACT 1947 - CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950. 
•     CABINET MISSION PLAN 1946 MEMBERS ARE STAFFORD CRIPPS, ALEXANDER, LAWRENCE - FORM CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY 389, PARTLY ELECTED 296 , PARTLY NOMINATED 93, STARTED WORK 1946.- 9.12.1936. SACHIDANAND SINHA FIRST PRESIDENT SENIOR MOST TO HOLD ELECTION, DR RAJENDRA PRASAD IS ELECTED AS PRESIDENT OF CONSTITUENT OF ASSEMBLY .
•     ELECTION FOR CONSITUENT ASSEMBLY 1946
•     FIRST MEETING OF CA 9 DEC 1946 OBJECTIVE RESOLUTION PASSED 22 JAN 1947
• NATIONAL FLAG ACCEPTED 22 JULY 1947
• INDIAN INDEPENDENCE 15 AUG 1947
•      DRAFTING COMMITTEE CONSTITUTION 29 AUGUST 1947
•     CONSTITUTION FORMED 26 NOV 1949
•      NATIONAL ANTHEM CHOSEN AND RAJENDRA PRASAD PRESIDENT OF INDIA 24 JAN 1950
• CONSTITUTION OF INDIA INTO FORCE 26 JAN 1950
• GOVT OF INDIA ACT 1935: PARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVT, CABINET SYSTEM; BICAMERALISAM; SINGLE CITIZEN SHIP; RULE OF LAW
• USA - FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS;  PROCESS OF IMPEACHENNT OF PRESIDENT ;  INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY; JUDICIAL REVIEW ;  PROCDRE OF REMOVAL OF HC SC JUDGES IMPEACHMENT ; 
• IRELAND : DPSP; ELECTION OF PRESIDENT ;  NOMINATED MEMBERS OF FAJYA SABHA ; 
• CANADA: FEDERATION WITH STRONG CENTRE; RESIDUARY POWERS WITH CENTRE; 
• GERMANY: EMERGENCY POWERS ; SUSPEND FR; 
• RUSSIA : FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES ; PLANNING MODEL OF DEVELOPMENT ; 
• AUSTRALIA : CONCURRENT LIST WITH UNION LIST STATE LISTS. FREEDOM OF TRADE AND COMMERCE, JOINT SITTING OF BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT 
• SOUTH AFRICA : AMENDMENT OF AN ACT ; ELECTION OF RS MEMBERS; 
• JAPAN : PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED BY LAW . 
• 
  

33    PARTS OF CONSTITUTION AND FORM  OF IT :

1. PREAMBLE 

K    ARTICLE 395 ARTICLE S NOW 460 NAMING ARTICLE NO AND ALPHABET A TO Z , AA TO ZZ AND ON 

    LAST ARTICLE WILL ALWAYS BE 395

    PARTS GROUP OF ARTICLES :  22 PARTS INITIALLY, NOW 25 PARTS 

    SCHEDULES : 8 INITIALLY NOW 12 SCHEDULES NUMBERING 1 TO 12

P     PREAMBLE 

    PART 1 UNION AND TERRITORY                 ARTICLES 1-4

PART 2 CITIZEN SHIP                                          ART 5-11

    NOW CITIZEN SHIP ACT GOVERNS

    PART 3 FUNDEMENTAL RIGHTS ,                 ART 12-35

     PART 4 DPSP                                                     ART 36-51

PART 4A FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES                     ART 51A NOT ENFORCCEABLE BY LAW

    PART 5 UNION GOVT                                     ART 52-151

    PART 6 STATE GOVT                                         ART 152-237

    PART 7 STATES IN PART B SINCE OMITTED          238

    PART 8 UNION TERRITORY                                  239-242

    PART 9 PANCHAYATI RAJ SYSTEM              ART 243-243O

    PART 9A  MUNICIPALITIES                                 243  P-ZG

    PART 8B- COOP SOCIETIES                             ART 243 ZH 243 ZP

PART 10 SCHEDULES TIBES AND SCHEDULED TRIBAL AREAS         ART 244

    

    PART 14 TRIBUNALS                                             323A        323B

    PART 15 ELECTIONS                                          324-329A

PART 18 EMERGENCY POWERS                         352-360

    PART 20 AMENDMENT OF CONSTITUTION          368

        PREAMBLE :

    We, the people of India

    Having solemnly resolved to constitute 

    INDIA 

Into a 

SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 

    AND TO SECURE  to all its citizens 

JUSTICE, SOCIAL ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL 

    LIBERTY OF THOUGHT, EXPRESSION, BELIEF, FAITH AND WORSHIP

K    EQUALITY OS STTUS AND OF OPPORTUNITY, AND TO PROMOTE AMONG THEM ALL

    FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unit and integrity of the nation 

    IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY THIS 

    

 DAY OF NOVEMBER 1949   26-11-1949

DO HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT -AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION -

part 1 articles 1-4

art 1 india or bharat is a union  of states , it is quasi federatin not federations as in usa 

it can acqire new terrirory 

union shall decide the boundary of  new states  art 2 a 

art 3 existing stats telangana andhra it is uinon who decides boudnary and name 

art 4 changes of states boundaries names will not be constitutional amendment.  simple majority is sufficient 

    part 2 articcles 5 to 11

citizenship

 act 1955

    1950 person born or domiciled in india 

    art 6 people who migrated to india from pakistan fter partition

    art 7 migrated to pakistan and then returned back 

    art 8 overseas citizens in eg uk south afrca, process to get citizenship

    art 9 onley single citizen ship, if you accept another coutnnry citizenship you will lose indian citizenship

    art 10 continuue as citizens 

    art 11 parliament can change rules to get and lose citizenship. act passed 1955

    by birth bfore 1 july 1987

by descent mother or father is indian citizen

    naturalisation - register 11 out of 14 years you should have stayed in india then naturalised citizen

 total 12/15j years resident 

     by incorporation of territory 

    losing  is by renunciation willingly

    deprivation outside of india for seven  years 

    termination of citizenship by authorities 

as sooon as one accepts citizenship of another country . indian citizenship is terminated. no dual citizenship is allowed in india .

    NRI NON RESIDENT INDIAN  

    

PART III FUNDMAENTAL RIGHTS 

ARTCILES- 14-32

 ODEA FROM USA BILL OF RIGHTS 

JUSTITICALBE IN A COURT OF LAW 

SC IS P ROTECTOR OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS 

ART 32 FOR SC AN 226 FOR HC TO WRIT JURISDICTION TO PROTECT DUNAMENTAL RIGHTRS 

ART LE 12

STAT WILL PROVIDE FINDAMENTAL RIGHS UNION STATE LOCAL GOVT 

STATE INCL PSU, . LOCAL GOVT IS PANCHAYT MUNICIPALITY 

ARTCLE 13 

JUCICOAL REVIEW 

ALL LAWS VIOLATIVE OF FUNDEMNTAL RIGHTS ARE NULL AND VOID 

SC CAN MAKE SUCH LAW UKRA VIRES CONSTITUTION  AND DECLARE IT NULL AND VOID 

LIST OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS 

RIGHT TO EQUALITY ART 14-18

14 EQUALITY OF PROTECTION BY LAW ALL HUMANS 

15 PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION ON BASIS OF CASTER, RELIGION SEX DOMICILE ETC

16 16 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY - RESERVATION FOR SC ST

17 UNTOUCHABILITY

18 ABLITION OF TITLES EXCEPT MILITARY ACADEMIC AND PADMA AWARDS BU GOVT 

     RIGHTS TO FREEDOMS 19-22

    19 FREEDOM OF SPEECH , ASSOCIATION, ASSEMBLE PEACEFULLU, ROAN ANY WHERE

BUINESS 

SETTLE ANY WHERE 

RESTRICTION FOR PUBLIC ORDER  ARTICLE 19 UNDER ARTICLE 356, 353 THISIIS SUSPECNDED DURING EMERGE CY

ART 20 

NO EX POST FACTO L AW , NO CONVICTION EXCEPT FOR VIOLATION OF LAW

NO DOUBLE JEOPARDY - TWO PUNISHMENS FOR SAME CRIM E

ART 21 - RIGHT TO LIFE 

INDIREACT - LIVE WITH DIGNITY, PRIVACY, LIVELIHOOD,, HEALTH, SHELTER 

CASE MANEKA GANDHI V UOIN OF INDIA 

ART 21 A  RIGHT TO EDUCATION 6 TO 14 YEAARS 86 AMENDMENT ACT 2002

ART 22

PROTECTION AGASINT ARBITRARY ARREST 

PRESENTED TO MAGISTRAATE WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER ARREST 

 LAWYER ALLOWED 

 DISTRICT LEVEL POLICE OFFICER TO PUBLICISE NAMES OF ARRESTED INDIVIDUALS 

    RIGHT AGASINT EXPLOITATION [ 23,24]

ART 23 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND FORCED LABOUR ARE PROHIBITED  ART 24 

CHILD LABOUR AND PROHIBITED LESS THAN 14 YEARS 

PART IV

RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION [ ART 25-28]

    ART 25 FREEDOME OF CONSCIENCCE AND PRACTICE AND PROGAGATION OF RELIGION 

    26 FREEEDOM TO MANAGAE RELIGIOS AFFAIRS 

ART 27 FPROHITION OF TAX ON RELIGOIUS GROUNDS

ART 28 

FREEDOME TO ATTEND RELIGOUS CEREMONIES AT EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS 

 PART V CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS [ 29-30]

29 

PROTECTION OF INTERSTS OF MINORITIES 

30 RIGHT TO MINORITIES TO ESTABLISH EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

    DOCTRINES  OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION :

    1. DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS : THE DIVISION OF POWER BWTWEE VRIOUS ORGANS OF THE STATE EXECUTIVE LEGISTLATURE AND JUDICIARY 

CASE RAM JAWAYA V STATE OF PUNJAB 1955: NOT FORALLY STATED IN ABSOLUTE RIGIDITY BUT WORKS IN PRACTICE

 INDIARA NEHRU GANDHI V RAJNARAIN 1975 : IT IS PART OF BASIC STRUCTURE OF CONSTITTION . NONE OF THREE WINGS CAN TAKE OVER THE FUNCTIONS OF OTHER .

    2. DOCTRINE OF PITH AND SUBSTANCE 

PITH MEASN TRUE NATURE AND SUBSTANCE MEANS THE MOST ESSENTIAL PART OF IT 

TO DETERMINE WHICH LAW RELATES TO WHICH SUJBJECT WE HAVE TO EXAMINE THE PITH AND SUBSTANCE OF WHAT IS DEALT WITH AND DECIDE  SEENTH SCHEDULE CASES AND CONFLICTS 

PRAFULLA V BANK OF COMMERCE 1946 : A STATE LAW ON MONEY LENDING  IS NOT INVALIED JUST BECASUE IT REFERS TO ONE ITEM OF PROMNISSORY NOTES WHICH FORM PART OF CENTRAL LIST  OR NI ACT BY CENTRE .

    3. DOCTRINE OF INCIDENTAL OR ANCILLARY POWERS 

THEN WHERE IS A NEED TO AID THE PRINCIPAL LEGISLATION IN QUESTION . THE DOCTRINE EVOLVED FROM CASE r v water field case 1963

state of raasthan v g chawla 1958

popwer to legislate on a topic of legilstalion carries with it the poer to legislate on an ancillary matter which an be siad to reasonable included in the power given 

4.    4. doctrine of severability 

    the whole law would not be invalied but on the provison which are ot in consonence with the constitution and fundamental right are invali if they a=can e seeparated 

AK GOPALAN V STATE OF MADRAS 

STATE OF BOMBAY V FN BALSARA : 8 PROVISION SOF BOMBAY PROHIBITION ACT HELD INVALID REST IS OK  AS IT CAN BE SEPARATED .

    5. DOCTRINE OF ECLISPSE 

 ANY LAW INCONSISTENT WITH fr IS NOT INVALID  OR DEAD, IT IS NOT DEAD  BUT OVERSHADOWED FOR THE TIME BEING .IF SITUATI CHANGES THEN IT WILL COME BACK INTO ITS OWN EHEN INCONSISTENCY IS REMOVED  BY CONSTITIONAL AMENDMENT 

BHIKAJI NARAIN DHAKRAS VS STATE OF MP 1955: TAKEOVER OF TRANSPORT BY STATE. VICE ART 19_1

    6. DOCTRINE OF TERRITORIAL NEXUS 

LAWS MADE BU STATE ARE NTO APPLICABLE OUTSIDE THE STATE EXCEPT WHEN THER IS A SUFFICIENT NEXUS BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE OBJECT OF LAW 

    AH WADIA V INCOME TAX COMISSIONER 

    STATE O BOMBAY V RMDC : IF YOU WORK HERE MOSTLY  YOU CAN BE TAXED HERE

    7. DOCTRINE OF COLORABLE LEGISLATION 

WHATEVER LEGISLATURE CANNOT DO DIRECTLY , IT CANNOT DO INDIRECTLY 

STATE OF BIHAR V KAMESWAR SINGH 

 BIHAR LAND REFORMS ACT HELD INVALID AS IT SOUGHT TO DEPRIVE THE PARITIONER OF COMPENSATION WHICH WAS NOT ALLOWED DIRECTLY.

    8. DOCTRINE OF PROSPECTIVE OVERRULING 

A DECISOIN MADE IN A CASE WOULD HAVE OPERATION ONLY IN FUTURE AND WILL NOT CARRY ANY RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT ON ANY PAST DECISION S  UNLESS SPECIFICALLY MADE TO BY LEGISLATURE. 

    9. DOCTRINE OF WAIVER 

    A PERSON IS HTE BEST JUDGE OF HIS OWN INTERESTS AND WHEN GIVEN FULL  KNOWLEDGE HE SHOLD DECIDE FOR HIMSELF . A PERSON HAS THE AUTHORITY TO WAIVE OFF RIGHS ARISING OUT OF A CONTRACT O STATURE BUT CANNOT RELINQUISH  CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS . LIKE FR

baseshwar nath v comission er of incom tax  FR cannot be waived 

    10.doctrine of pleasure 

holding of a govt office during the pleasure of the president  ART 311

UNION OF INDIA V BALBIR SINGH . PU BLIC SERVANT  DISMISSAL DUE TO UNRELATED CAUSE NOT LINKED TO   SECURITY OF STATE. NOT VALID . 

    11.  DOCTRINE OF LACHES 

IF A LENGTHY WAIT IN CLAIMING LEGAL RIGHT CAIM HAS HARMED  THE OPPOSING PARTY, THE RIGHT CANNOT BE ALLOWED . LAW SUPPORTS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AOBUT THEIR RIGHTS AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS .

RRAAVINDRA JAIN V UNION OF INDIA.   : EXCESSIVE DELAY WILL KILL THE RIGHT . 

    12. DOCTRINE OF BASIC STRUCTURE 

KESHAVANAND BHARATI CASE V SATE OF KERALAL  GAVE DOCTRINE 

    ON DIVISION OF POWERS BETWEEN ORGANS OF STATE 

 TIME LINE 

    FIRST AMENDEMENT 1951 WHICH ADDED ART 31A 31B WHICH GAVE POWER TO GOVERNMENT TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY - 

THIS WAS CHALLENGED IN  SHANKAR I PRASAD V UNION OF INDIA   SC ACCEPTED POWER OF PARTLIAMENT TO AMEND CONSTITTION UNDE ARTILE 368 INCL FR  LAW UNDER 13_3 DOES NOT COVER CONSTITUIONAL AMENDMENT LAW 

17TH AMENDMENT 1968,  PARAENT AMENDED 31A AS 44 NEW ACTS ARE ADDED IN 9TH SCHEDLE , 

CHALLENGED IN SAJJAN SINGHV STATE OF RAJASTHAN 

SC APPROVED DECCISION OF SHANNKAR I PRASAD CASE - HELD PARLIAMENT POWERS TO AMEND FR

CHALLENGED IN  golakGOLAKNATH V STATE OF P;UNJAB SHER IT WAS HELD THAT  13_3 LAW INLCUDEDS AMENDMENT ACT  WHICH MAKES IT SUJBECT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW AND CANNOT TAKE AWAY  FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT 

24TH AMENDMENT 1973 PARLIAENT ADDED 13_4 AND 368)_3

 CHALLENGED IN 1973  KESHAVANAND BHARATI V STAE O F KERALA ,  SC OVERRULED ITS DECISION IN GOLAK NATH CASE AND HELD PARLIAMENT CANNOT DESTROUY BASIC STRUCTURE OF CONSTITUTION 

42ND AMENDMENT 1976 ADDED 368_4AND 368_5 

CHALLENGED IN MINERVA MILLS V UNION O FINDIA 

HELD 365_4 AND 365_5 INVALIED AND SAID AMENDMENTS CAN BE EXAMINED BY SC UNDER JUCICIAL REVIEW AND LIMNITED NATURE OF POWER TO AMEND CONSTITUTION  

    CASES ON CONSTITUTION 

PREAMBLE 

RE BERUBARI CASE : preamble is not part of constittuion and doess not have any actionable contents 

    GOLAKNATH V STATE OF PUNJAB -  CAN TAKEAWAY PROPERTY

    KESAVANANADA BHARATI V STATE OF KERALA  BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE  incl JUDICIAL REVIEW , 

    INDIRA nehru gandhi case v raj narain case election case : 329A CHALLENGED AND STRUCK OFF AS JUDICIAL REVIEWS CANNOT BE TAKEN AWAY. FREE AND FAIR ELECTION IS PART OF BASIC STRUCTURE OF CONSTITUTION 

    MINERVA MILLS CASE  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PREAMBLE , FR AND DPSP . part iii and iv are  complementary to each other 

PART III FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS 

    ART 13 

ALL LAWS VIOLATIVE AOF FR ARE NULL AND VOID TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE INCONSISTENT IF SEPARABLE , THEY  CAN  ECLIPSE AND COME OUT ONCE AMENDED 

    MARBURY V MADISON  - USA - ESTABLISHES JUDICIAL REVIEW CONCEPT - INDIAN CASE L CHANDRAKUMAR V UNION OF INDIA  - SC UNDER 32 AND HC UNDER 226 HAVE JUCIAL REVIEW POWERS 

DOCTRINE OF SEVERABILITY IN CASES OF AK GOPALN V STATE OF MADRAS  AND ROMESH THAPAR V STATE OF MADRAS 

    DOCTRINE OF ECLIPSE STATE OF GUJARAT V AMBIKA MILLS - APPLICABLE FOR CITIZEN ns non xitizens 

DOCTRINE OF WAIVER - ART 21 OF RIGHT TO LIFE, ATTEMPT TO SUICIDE . FR CANNOT BE WAIVED 

BASESWARNATH V INCOME TAX COMMISIOER ART 14 CONCEPT OF EQUAITY CANNOT BE WAIVED BY CITIZEN

EQUALITY BEFORE LAW

NO DISCRIMINATINO BETWEEN CITIZENS BASAED ON CASTE SEX DOMICILE AGE ETC

EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAW 

INTELLIGIBLE DIFFERENTIA - MAKE CLASSES OF CITIZENS ON VALID GROUNDS 

RATIONAL NEXUS  - LINK BETWEEN HOW YOU MAKE CLASSES A ND HOW TO TREAT THEM  IN RELATION WITH OBJECTIVE SOUGHT TO B ACHIEVED 

CASE STATE OF BOMBAY V FN BALSARA  FOR INTELIIGIBLE DIFFERENTIA 

ANWAR ALI SARKAR V STATE OF WEST BENGAL  FOR RATIONAL NEXUS 

EV ROYAPPA VS STATE OF TN  - WE GOT NEW DOCTRINE OF EQUALITY  - IF ACTION IS ARBITRARY  THEN IT PRESUMED ITO BE AGAINST EQUALITY 

RANDHIR SINGH V UNION OF INDIA  EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK 

ART 15 : NO DISCRIMNATION ON FIVE GROUNDS , IT CAN BE DONE BASED ON ANY OTHER VALID GROUND 

 DOMICILE QUOTA HELD VALID  IN DP JOSHI V STATE OF MP

C. DEVARJAN V STATE OF MADRAS  -- SC ST OBC GIVEN SPECIAL TREATMENT 

MR BALAJI V STATE OF MYSORE - LIMIT OF RESERVATION IS 50%., CASTER CANNOT BE SOLE CRITERIA FOR RESERVATOIN ;  YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER SOCIAL BACKWARD NESS ALSO

 16_4 IS AN EXCEPTION TO 16_1. 

T DEVADASAN CASE  - CARRY FORWARD OF QUOTA OF RESERVATION TO NEXT YEAR HELD INVALID .

    

`ART 16

SEVEN GROUNDS OF NO DISCRIIMINATINO IN EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES 

15,16 DPSP   FORM BASIS OF WELFARE STATE  THEY ARE CALLED COMPENSATORY BENEFITS BY DR AMBEDKAR 

NM THOMAS V STATE OF KERALA 

 RESERVATION IN PROMOTIN IS VALID 

AKHIL BHARATIYA SOCHIT KARMACHARI V UNION OF INDIA  - OVERRULED T DEVADASAN AND HELD CARRY FORWARD RULE AS VALID 

 50% LIMIT RULE IF GUIDELINE BUT IT CAN BE EXCEEDED AT WILL BY THE GOVT AS PER NEED 

INDRA SAWHNEY V UNION OF INDIA - RESERVATION VATION MANDAL COMMISSION CASE  OVERRULED NM THOMAS JUDGEMENT ADN HEL D RESERVATION IN PROMOTION AS INVALID

  77TH AMENDMENT OF CONSTITUTION CARRIED OUT AND PROMOTION RESERVATINO WAS HLED TO VE VALID AS PER LAW 

 ART 19 

FREEDOMOF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION 

ROMESH THAPAR V STATE OF MADRAS , PUBLISHING OF CRITICISM IS VALID 

 NO BAN POSSIBLE AS PUBLIC SAFETY AS GROUND IS NOT AVAILABLE UNDER 19_2 WHICH ERESTRCITS FREEDOM UNDER 19_1_A

GOVT THEM AMANDED 19_2 AND INSERTED PUBLIC ORDER, SECURITY OF STATE ADN INCITEMENT TO AN OFFENCE AS REASONABLE GROUNDS TO RESTRICT FR OF FREE SPEECH UNDER 19_1_A

HAMDARD DAWAKHANA V UNION OF  INDIA  - ADVERTISEMENTS ARE NOT FREE SPEECH BUT COMMERCIAL CATEGORY AND CAN BE CURTAILED 

ADS ARE COVERED UNDER TRADE AND COMMERCE FREEDOMS

ART 21

    RIGHT TO LIFE  AND PERSONAL LIBERTY 

THREE CASES 

AK GOPALAN CASE - PD ACT - ART 19, 21 ARE VALID AND NO CONNECTION . PRODURE ESTABLISHED BY LAW IS NOT SAME AS DUE PROCESS OF

ADM JABALPUR CASE: FR CANNOT BE ENFORCED UNDER EMERGENCCY, WRITS NO SUSTAINABLE 

MANEKA GANDHI CASE :  PASSPORT CASE : WIDER VIEW TAKEN - 14,19,21 GOLDEN TRIANGLE ARE INTERLINKED AND LAW RESTRICTING FR SHOULD BE SEEN UNDER TH ETRIANGLE FRS TOGETHER . RIGHT TO TRAVEL IS FR LIFE RIGHTH

KSPUTTASWAMY CASE : RIGHT TO PRIVACY, DIGITAL DATA PROTECTION 

MONIHINI JAIN VS STATE O F KARNATAKA : FOR RIGHT TO EDUCATION 

HUSSAINARA KHATOON V STATE OF BIHAR: FOR RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL 

PUCL V UOI:  RIGHT TO PRIVACY

OLGA TELLIS V BMS  :  RIGHT TO LIVELIEHOOD 

ART 25 TO 28 DEAL WITH MINORITY RIGHTS AND SECULARISM 

SR BOMMAI V UOI  - SECULARISM AND EMERGENCY DECLARATION IN STATE 

: INDIAN SECULARISM IS DIFFERENT FROM SECULARISM AS UNDERSTOOD IN USA . IN INDIA SECULARISM IS BASIC FEATURE OF CONSTITTION .

MOHD HAMMEED QUREISHI V STATE OF BIHAR - BAN ON F COW SLAUGHTER IS NOT AGAINST SECULARISM  

    ESSENTIAL COMPONENT OF HINDUISM IF NOT BAN ON COW SLAUGHTER .

SP GUPTA CS FIRST CASE OF JUDGES TRANSFER CASE , CONSULTATION IS NOT CONCURRENCCE 

SC JUDGES UNDER 124 AND HC HUDGES APPT MMT UNDER 217

SECOND JUDGES CASE SC  V  AOR ASSOCIATION OF INDIA  RULED CONSULT IS EQUAL TO CONCURRENCE , MUST ACT ON WHAT CJI SAYS 

THIRD JUDGES CASE BY SPECIAL REFERENCE CASE OF 1998 HLED THA CONSULTATION DOES NOT LIMIT TO JUST CJI BUT ALSO FOUR OTHER SENIOR MNOST JUDGES OF SC 

352-360 EMERGENCY 

MINERVA MILLS V UOI, 38 39 42 AMENDMENTS WERE CHAGED HELD JUCDICIAL REVIEW CANNOT BE CURTAILED , GROUNDS OF EMERBENCY CAN JUDICIALLY REVIEWED, IF GORUNND IS MALAFIDE,, ABSURD IT CAN BE OVERTURNED . 

SR BOMMAI V UOI - SECULARISM IS A BASIC FEATURE. PRESIDENT POWER TO IMOSE EMERGENCY IS NOT ABSOLUTE BUT GROUND BASED  AND GROUND CAN BE REVIEWED BY SC 

AMENDMENTS 

 AND ARTICLE 

    

    

 READ TO GETHER 

KSHANKARI PRASAD, SAJJAN SINGH 

GOLAKNATH CAS, KESAVANAND BHARATI CASE S

NATIONAL EMERECY UNDE SEC 

    

12. 

 

CANNOT TAKE AWAY RIGHT TO LIFE AND WRIT JURISDCTION  WAR EXTERNA AGGRESSON ARMED REBELLION INTERNAL ARE GOUNDS FOR EMERGENCY