5th amendment

ABSTRACT

The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of India, known as The Constitution 5th Amendment Act, 1955.The 5th Amendment re-enacted the proviso to Article 3 of the Constitution. this act empowered the President to prescribe a time limit for a State Legislature to deliver its views and opinion on the proposed Central laws relating to the formation of new States ,alteration of areas, boundaries and names of the existing States. The amendment permits the President of India to extend the prescribed limit, or to prohibit any such bill from being introduced in Parliament after the expiry of the prescribed or extended period.

 

INTRODUCTION

The Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, Enacted in 1955, amended Article three of the Indian Constitution which enables Parliament to effect, by law, reorganization inter se of the states constituting the Indian Union. The Parliament is empowered to enact a law to reorganize the present states by setting up new states out of the territories of the present states, via uniting two or extra states or parts of states, by using uniting any territory to a part of any country, by means of changing their limitations; or by separating the territory from, growing or diminishing the location of, or by means of converting the name of, a country.

The Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act was enacted in 1955 and it amended Article 3 of the Constitution of India.

This Article envisaged that earlier than Parliament passed an Act to re-organize the States, the Bill for the purpose should be referred by using the President to the State Legislatures concerned for expression in their perspectives thereon. An illness within the original Article three turned into that it did no longer lay down a time-limit inside which the States concerned had been too explicit their perspectives. The absence of any such restriction may want to cause put off or maybe maintain up Parliamentary Legislation for the motive.

The Government of India become annoying to expedite the re-corporation of the States on a linguistic foundation and it apprehended that an aggrieved State would possibly forestall the passage of the necessary legislation by using Parliament merely by means of non-expression of its views for any length of time. The Amending Act consequently made it possible for the President to set a time limit inside which a State should explicit its views. On the expiry of the prescribed time restriction, Parliament should proceed with the matter without waiting for the perspectives of the State involved.

HISTORY IN THE BACK OF THE CONSTITUTION

(Fifth Amendment) Act, 1955

The Constituent Assembly of India sat for the first time on December nine, 1946, which specializes in deliberations on specific capabilities or segments which brought about the adoption of the Constitution and a democratic republic. The purpose of the charter-makers can be inferred by way of the Judiciary’s imperative position as a protector of the constitutional values, to undo the harm achieved by way of the legislature and the government.

The original Article 3 became so drafted because of 3 most important reasons:

1.When it turned into drafted, the Princely States had not been completely incorporated,

2.There become also the possibility of reorganization of states on a linguistic basis; and three. Constituent Assembly had foreseen that such reorganization could not be postponed for lengthy. 

Therefore, accordingly, Article 3 was integrated inside the Constitution supplying a clean and easy method for the reorganization of the states at any time.

When Article 3 became drafted, the Princely States were not completely integrated, and there existed the possibility of reorganization of states on the linguistic foundation. Thus, the Constituent Assembly had foreseen that such reorganization could not be postponed for lengthy.

It did now not lay down a time-restrict inside which the states concerned were too specific their views, which can cause postpone or even carry the parliamentary rules to a standstill. The government of India wanted the reorganization of the states on a linguistic basis which become hampered by means of non-expression for any period of time.

The Amending Act provided for the President to set a time restriction thru which the Parliament should proceed with the matter without looking forward to the perspectives of the kingdom worried. Thus, made the complaints concerning the reorganization of states green and this propelled the states to test the troubles related to them responsibly. After the amendment, the system was modified and the exercise of this energy by way of the Parliament changed into difficulty to the following  conditions:

A Bill for such a reason can’t be added inside the Parliament besides on the advice of the President and

If the Bill impacts the place, call, or obstacles of a State, then earlier than recommending its consideration to the Parliament, the President has to refer the identical to the State Legislature concerned.

 

THE POST AMENDMENT CHANGES

Andhra Pradesh was the primary nation to be reorganized after independence in which turned into separation from the erstwhile Madras Province. The formation of Andhra Pradesh became one such example of the reorganization which became a reason for the change to the said article.

Article three provided the State Legislature and the Parliament with the authority to skip the bill of the reorganization. The cause became to offer an opportunity to the concerned State Legislature to express its perspectives on the proposals contained within the bill.

After the change, a variety of confusion surfaced concerning the means of the phrases “explicit view of the State Legislature” ensuing in a blatant violation of Article three and in a drastic growth in the range of cases. The confusion turned into sooner or later placed to relaxation by using the Apex Court in Babulal Parate v. The State of Bombay [1]whilst the State Reorganization Bill turned into brought within the Lok Sabha. Some of its clauses, precisely Clause 8, 9, and 10, contained an offer for the formation of the three separate units, specifically,

UNION TERRITORY OF BOMBAY;

State of Maharashtra consisting of Marathwada and Vidharbha and the State of Gujarat along with Saurashtra and kutch.

The Bill changed into added inside the Lok Sabha on the advice of the President as required by using the proviso to Article three of the Constitution. This becomes then noted the Joint Select Committee of each the houses which made its file dated July 16, 1956. In furtherance of the Report, a few parts of the Bill were amended by using the Parliament. On being passed by each of the houses, it received the President’s assent and got here to be referred to as the State Reorganisation Act, 1956. Instead of the three separate gadgets, a composite kingdom of Bombay became constituted below Section eight(1) of the Act.

Hence, there may be no violation of Article three of the Constitution, and the Act or any of its provisions aren’t invalid on that floor.

 

DIFFICULTY IN ARTICLE 3

Trouble arose whilst it changed into observed that the original Article 3 did no longer lay down a time-restriction within which the states concerned were to specific their perspectives. The absence of this sort of restrict should purpose put off or maybe convey the parliamentary regulation, for the said motive, to a standstill. The government of India turned into annoying to expedite the reorganization of the states on a linguistic basis which became however hampered by the Parliament simply by way of non-expression of its views for any length of time.

RESOLUTION FOR THE PROBLEM

The Amending Act, consequently, made it viable for the President to set a time-restrict thru which the Parliament may want to continue with the matter without awaiting the views of the state worried. This Amendment made the lawsuits regarding reorganization of states efficient and this propelled the states to test at the troubles related to them responsibly. After the modification, the method became changed and the exercising of this electricity by using the Parliament became difficulty to the following situations:

(1) A Bill for this sort of cause cannot be introduced inside the Parliament besides on the recommendation of the President.

(2) If the Bill influences the region, call or barriers of a State, then earlier than recommending its consideration to Parliament, the President has to refer the equal to the State Legislature concerned for expressing its perspectives on it inside such time as he may additionally fix.

ARTICLE 3: POST AMENDMENT

Andhra Pradesh becomes the first state to be reorganized after independence in which it was separated from the erstwhile Madras Province. The formation of Andhra Pradesh became one such instance of the reorganization which became a purpose for the amendment to the said article.

Article 3 gave Parliament the authority to bypass the invoice of reorganization. But to bypass it, the invoice first needed to be surpassed through the State Legislature. The purpose of the supply was to provide an opportunity to the worried State Legislature to express its views on the proposals contained within the invoice. Parliament changed into however in no way certain with the aid of these views. All that is pondered is that the Parliament must have earlier than it the views of the State Legislature laid low with the proposals contained within the bill, however, the Parliament is unfastened to cope with the problem in any way it thinks in shape and might be given or reject what the State Legislature says. 

CONFUSION FOR THAT MEANS OF PHRASES

After the modification, numerous confusion surfaced concerning the means of the terms “express view of the State Legislature” ensuing in a blatant violation of Article three and in a drastic growth in the wide variety of cases. The confusion become in the end put to rest through the Apex Court in Babulal Parate v. The State Of Bombay, while the State Reorganization Bill become delivered in the Lok Sabha. Some of its clauses, precisely Clause 8, 9, and 10, contained a proposal for the formation of 3 separate gadgets, namely, (1) Union Territory of Bombay; (2) State of Maharashtra consisting of Marathwada and Vidharbha and (3) State of Gujarat inclusive of Saurashtra and Kutch.

The Bill was changed into added in the Lok Sabha on the recommendation of the President as required by the proviso to Article three of the Constitution. This was then referred to the Joint Select Committee of both the homes which made its file dated July 16, 1956. In furtherance of the Report, a few parts of the Bill have been amended with the aid of the Parliament. On being passed by way of each of the houses, it received the President’s assent and got here to be called the State Reorganisation Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as the Act.

Instead of 3 separate units, a composite kingdom of Bombay was constituted under Section 8(1) of the Act.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this case, the Appellant on September 12, 1956, filed a writ petition beneath Article 226 of the Indian Constitution inside the High Court of Bombay hard the formation of the composite country of Bombay. It turned into the submission of the Appellant that the formation contravened Article three of the Constitution in as plenty because the legislature of Bombay had no possibility of expressing its views on such formation. The Appellant as a consequence prayed that Section four and other allied sections of the Act are void and for this reason, they ought to not be enforced. The Writ Petition turned into dismissed by way of the Bombay High Court on the floor that there’s no violation of Article three of the Constitution. Thus, the Appellant had filed an appeal under Article 132(1) of the Indian Constitution by using obtaining the capable certificates.

ISSUE

What is the scope and effect of Article three of the Indian Constitution and specifically that of the proviso thereto as it stands after the Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, 1955?

JUDGMENT WITH THE AID OF JUSTICE SK DAS:

It is obvious that the Article gives power to the Parliament to make laws in respect of any of the five subjects as referred to in clause (a) to (e). The substance part of the thing is followed by the proviso which lays down sure situations for the exercise of such electricity. The situations laid down by the proviso are:

  1. No invoice will be delivered besides via the advice of the President.

2.Where the suggestion contained within the invoice impacts the limits, region, or name of the kingdom, it must be referred with the aid of the President to the Legislature of that State for expressing its views.

But there may be not anything that says that the Parliament must be given or act upon the perspectives as expressed by the State Legislature. Thus, the essential detail of the second proviso is that the President must refer the thought to the State Legislature. When an offer contained within the Bill is modified ultimately with the aid of an amendment by using the Parliament, the proviso does now not say that a fresh bill has to be added in the State Legislature.

Hence, there may be no violation of Article three of the Constitution, and the Act or any of its provisions are not invalid on that floor.

CONCLUSION

To finish all of it, we can say that the fifth constitutional change came to be a help and has played a powerful and efficient function in reorganizing the states as consistent with the need. Henceforth, the amendment which added inside the clauses referring to time restriction helped in persuading the kingdom governments, as well as the Parliament too, are seeking their attention in the subjects associated with nation reorganization[SS1] .


[1]  [ Babulal Parate vs State of Bombay [1960 SCR (1) 605] ]


 [SS1]The article is good for publication