Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Top 100 Law Firm in India

For the same reason I cannot agree with the learned Attorney- General that in cases like these, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 we should enquire as to what was the dominant intention of the legislature in enact- ing the law and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 that the operation of article would be excluded if it is proved that the legislature had no inten- tion to discriminate, though discrimination was the necessary consequence of the Act. who delivered the leading judgment, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 which Das and Banerjee JJ. The procedure would be identical in respect of all persons when it was allowed and USSC ; U.

In my judgment, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 this part of the section, properly construed and understood, does not confer an uncontrolled and unguided power on the State government. Even those who propound this theory are driven to making qualifica- tions. delivered separate judgments agreeing with the conclusion of the Chief Justice, Das Gupta J,, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 however, going further and holding that section was unconstitutional in its entirety inasmuch as “the clas- sification sought to be made on the expediency of speedier trial is not a well-defined classification.

” A point was made by the Attorney-General in course of his arguments that the equality rule is not violated simply because a statute confers unregulated discretion on officers or Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 on administrative agencies. The differ- entia which is the basis of the classification and the object of the Act are distinct things and what is necessary is that there must be a nexus between them. In answer to the query of the Court he formulates an alternative test in the following words: If there is in fact inequality of treatment and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 such inequality is not made with a special intention of prejudic- ing any.

The difference of opinion in that case was not so much on the principles to be applied as to the effect of the application of such principles. It is now well established that while arti- cle is designed to prevent a person or class of persons from being singled out from others similarly situated for the purpose of being specially subjected to discriminating and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 hostile legislation, it does not insist on an “abstract symmetry” in the sense that every piece of legislation must have universal application.

The order in question laid down that it would be unlawful for any person to engage in laundry business within the corporate limits “without having first obtained the consent of the Board of Supervi- sors except the same to be located in a building constructed either of brick or stone. If the impugned legislation is a special law applicable only to a certain class of persons, the court must further enquire whether the classi- fication is founded on a reasonable basis having regard to the object to be attained, or is arbitrary.

The Stale of Madras S. The Code of Criminal Procedure has by the process of classification prescribed different modes of procedure for trial of different of- fences. The right to equality postulated by article is as much a fundamental right as any other fundamental right dealt with in Part III of the Constitution. On one side of the line are grouped those cases which the State Government chooses to assign to the Special Court; on the other side stand the rest which the State Government does not think fit and proper to touch.

of the Constitution and is void inasmuch as per FAZL ALl, MAHAJAN, MUKHERJEA, and CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR JJ. In such cases it may be possible to attack the legislation on the ground of improper delegation of authority or the acts of the officers may be challenged on the ground of wrongful or mala fide exercise of powers; but no question of infringement of article of the Constitution could possibly arise. Some by the mere accident of birth inherit riches, others are born to pover- ty.

Whether a law conferring discretionary powers on an administrative authority is constitutionally valid or not should not be determined on the assumption that such authority will act in an arbitrary manner in exercising the discretion committed to it. A careful perusal of this decision will make it quite clear that the Court upheld the validity of the statute impugned in that case, not on the ground that the inequality was of minor importance but, on the ground that the classification of establishments according to the number of workmen employed therein was based on an intelli- gible distinction having a rational relation to the subject-matter of the legislation in question.

The other case relied upon by the learned Attorney- General is the case of Brown v. I grant that this means that the same things will be viewed differently at different times. They cannot, in my judgment, be enunciated in static form by hidebound rules and arbitrarily applied standards or tests. ” The question was answered in the affirmative. In my opinion, this contention cannot be accepted for Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 more reasons than one. Do not these special circumstances add a peculiar quality to these of- fences or classes of offences or classes of cases which distinguish them from stray cases of similar crimes and is it not reasonable and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 even necessary to arm the State with power to classify them into a separate group and deal with them promptly ?

This, however, cannot mean that all laws must be general in character and universal in application. , expressed the opinion that it was within the power of the State to make such differentiation and the law was perfectly consti- tutional. In dealing with this ques- tion, the following facts have to be borne in mind:– The framers of the Act have merely copied the provi- sions of the Ordinance of which was promulgated when there was no provision similar to article of the present Constitution.

But a discriminatory purpose is not presumed; there must be a showing of clear and intentional discrimination”. It can recognise even “degrees of evil ” , but the classification should never be arbitrary, artificial or Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 evasive. Classification based on those relations need not be constituted by an exact or scientific exclusion or Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 inclusion of persons or things. The passage purports to be founded on the decision in Jeffrey Manufac- turing Co.

It is to be observed that equality in the abstract is not guaran- teed but only equality before the law. I realise that this is a function which is incapable of exact definition but I do not view that with dismay. The petitioner, a chairman, and about of his countrymen applied to the Board of Supervisors to continue their clotheswashing busi- ness in wooden buildings which they had been occupying for Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 many years, but in all cases licence was refused, whereas not a single one of the petitions presented by persons who were not subjects of China had been refused.

” It has not, however, been urged before us that the addition of these extra words has made any substantial difference in its practical application. The material facts, which are not controverted, may be shortly stated as follows. Some are rich and some are poor. As observed by Kania C. –Act constituting special courts and empowering State Government to refer “cases” or “offences” or “classes of cases” or “classes of offences” to such Court–Constitutional validity–Fundamental right to equality before the law and equal protection of the laws–Construction of Act–Reference to preamble–Act not classifying cases or laying down standard for classifica- tion–Intention of legislature how far material–Validity of notification under Act–Test of equality before Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815–Essen- tials of reasonable classification–Necessity for speedier trial, whether reasonable ground for discrimination.

The question is whether section which really imposes this substantial inequality on particular persons can be saved from the operation of article on the principle of ration- al classification of the kind permissible in law. With the utmost respect I cannot see how these vague generalisations serve to clarify the position. I have no doubt those tests serve as a rough and ready guide in some cases but they are not the only tests, nor are they the true tests on a final analysis.

and I in the Nagpur High Court in Bhagwati Charan Shukla’s case . ” It is, in substance, modelled upon the equal pro- tection clause, occurring in the Fourteenth Amendment of the American Constitution with a further addition of the rule of “equality before the law”, which is an established maxim of the English Constitution. In some American cases, there is a reference to “pur- poseful or intentional discrimination”, and it was argued that unless we can discover an evil intention or a deliber- ate design to mete out unequal treatment behind the Act, it cannot be impugned.