| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1960 SLG 324 1960 SLD 324 1960 AIR 356 1960 SCR 346 |
Supreme Court of India
SINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P.(CJ), GAJENDRAGADKAR, P.B., SUBBARAO, K., GUPTA, K.C. DAS, SHAH, J.C.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P.(CJ), GAJENDRAGADKAR, P.B., SUBBARAO, K., GUPTA, K.C. DAS, SHAH, J.C.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS
VS
. THAKUR GANGA SINGH AND ANOTHER
Law: Constitution of India
Section: 132(2)
ACT: Supreme Court, Appellate jurisdiction of-Special leave to appeal-When can be granted-Substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution-Meaning of Constitution of India, Art. 132(2). HEADNOTE: The respondents filed a petition in the High Court of Jammu JUDGMENT: Kashmir Motor Vehicles Rules. The High Court held that the said rule was ultra vires as offendingArt. 14 of the Constitution. The appellants filed an application in the High Court for a certificate under Art. 132(1) of the Constitution which was rejected on the ground that no substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution was involved in the case. Thereafter the appellant applied to this Court for special leave under Art. 132(2) of the Constitution, which was granted with liberty to the respondents to raise the question of maintainability of the appeal. There was no controversy between the parties in regard to the interpretation of Art. 14 of the Constitution, and the dispute centered round the question whether the impugned rule stood the test of reasonable classification. The respondents raised a preliminary objection that special leave under Art. 132(2) of the Constitution could be granted by this court only if it was satisfied that the case involved a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, and that since, in the present case, the interpretation of Art. 14 of the Constitution was not in dispute by reason of a series of decisions of this Court and no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, could arise for consideration, no special leave could be granted under the said Article. It was contended on behalf of the appellants that whenever a question of classification was raised that by itself involved the interpretation of Art. 14 of the Constitution so far as the impugned classification was concerned. Held, that the principle underlying Art. 132(2) of the Constitution is that the final authority of interpreting the Constitution must rest with the Supreme Court. With that object that Article is freed from other limitations imposed under Arts. 133 and 134 and the right of appeal of the widest amplitude…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492