Skip to main content

Fundamental duties and judiciary

 FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES AND JUDICIARY


Part IV-A, which deals with fundamental duties of the citizens, was added by the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976, in accordance with the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee. It thus brought the Constitution of India in line with Article 29 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. When the court is called ahead to give effect to the directive principles and the fundamental duty, the court is not to wave its shoulders and say that priorities are a matter of policy and so it is an issue for the policy-making power. Practically speaking, these duties are ethical and societal obligations of Indian citizens to develop into accountable citizens and build up the country. The fundamental duties can be promoted by constitutional means and can be forced only by constitutional methods. Constitutional enactment of fundamental duties must be used by courts as a tool to tap, in State action which is diverting away from constitutional values. The fundamental duties enjoined on citizens under Article 51-A should also guide the legislative and executive actions of nominated or non-elected institutions and organizations of the citizens together with the municipal bodies. As the Verma Committee (1999) on fundamental duties said essentially all that is contained in the fundamental duties is just a codification of tasks integral to the Indian way of life. A scrutiny of the clauses of Article 51-A indicates that a number of these clauses basically refer to such values which have been a part of the Indian tradition, mythology, religion, and practices. Although the fundamental duties were inserted during the emergency and very noble in the literal sense, cannot either be part of a constitution or a statute nor give any locus standing. They cannot be enforced by a court, but only by constitutional methods. Nevertheless, fundamental duties, though not enforceable by mandamus or any other legal remedy still provide a valuable guide and aid to interpretation of constitutional and legal issues. In the case of doubt or choice, people’s wish as manifested through Article 51-A can be served as a guide not only for resolving the issue but also for constructing or molding the relief to be given by the courts. In AIIMS Student’s Union vs AIIM11, a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court made it clear that fundamental duties, though not enforceable by a writ of the court, yet provide valuable guidance and aid to interpretation and resolution of constitutional and legal issues. Again in L.K. Koolwal v. the State of Rajasthan the Court held Article 51-A is the duty of the citizens however, Article 51-A gives a right to the citizens to move the court for the enforcement of the duty cast on State, instrumentalities, agencies, departments, local bodies and statutory authorities created under the law of the State. The Hon’ble Court on similar occasion also stated that the collective duties of the citizens imply the duty of the State. However, this is not denying that the State does not have duties. If the State does not have duties, then it is under Parts III and IV of the Constitution, namely, fundamental rights and directive principles, where analogous negative and positive duties lie in the State.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree