'The Idea Of 'Basic Structure' Was Advocated For The First Time in India In Golaknath Case By Barrister M.K. Nambiar': Chief Justice UU Lalit

Meloth Krishnan Nambyar planted the seeds of "such fundamental and basic ideas", which although did not receive the imprimatur of the highest court of the land immediately, have resulted in "a huge banyan tree", under the shadow of which, every citizen can have solace and say with thanks, "It is for your efforts that the constitutional history has brought us here", said Chief Justice U.U. Lalit. Chief Justice Lalit was delivering the Second M.K. Nambyar Memorial Lecture organised by SASTRA Deemed to be University under the aegis of the C.S. Vaidyanathan Chair on Law and Development. Former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice B.N. Srikrishna presided over the event. Also in attendance were retired Justice Santosh Hegde of the Supreme Court, former Attorney-General K.K. Venugopal, and Senior Advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan. "Any youngster who joins the bar and who has something to do with the constitutional law of this country would always be guided by one single name to begin with and that is M.K. Nambyar," the Chief Justice began. He also reminisced about his time as a junior in the chambers of the veteran advocate and former Attorney-General, Soli S. Sorabjee, who authored 'From Gopalan to Golaknath, and Beyond: A Tribute to Mr. M.K. Nambyar'. The Chief Justice said, "Mr. Sorabjee was extremely proud of his work, 'From Gopalan to Golaknath', which dealt with M.K. Nambyar's contribution. Today, I thought that this particular occasion would warrant some contribution from my side as well as to how I understood Gopalan and to what extent the principles laid down in Gopalan have travelled and been part of our jurisprudence and our ethos." "Within two months of the Supreme Court being established, two Nambyars entered the Court," Chief Justice Lalit recounted, referring to an article he had read, "One, Gopalan Nambiar, through the registry of the Supreme Court. And one M.K. Nambyar, through the court halls." Arguably, the greatest claim to fame of M.K. Nambyar was his appearance and arguments in the case of A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras [AIR 1950 SC 27], in which Sorabjee said the barrister had "made his mark as a constitutional lawyer". Sorabjee also called it a "curious coincidence" that the full name of his client was Ayilliath Kuttieri Gopalan Nambiar. A.K. Gopan was a popular Indian communist leader who had been arrested under a preventive detention law. "That writ petition was numbered as O.P. No 13 of 1950. Many research scholars keep thinking about what those items were, numbered 1 to 12. History does not know what those were. But O.P. No. 13 of 1950 has become immortal in our jurisprudential and constitutional history," Chief Justice Lalit remarked. Highlighting the profundity and force of Nambyar's submissions, the Chief Justice said that "each one of the six Judges on the Bench" extensively quoted the "brilliant submissions" advanced by the barrister. The Chief Justice added, "Out of those submissions, three principles have emerged, which have been adopted in our jurisprudence over time." Chief Justice H.J. Kania had set out the most crucial submission made by Nambyar, which had far-reaching effects on Indian constitutional law. Nambyar had advocated for a conjoined reading of Articles 19 and 21, arguing that a common thread ran through all the liberties enshrined in Part III. This contention was rejected by the Supreme Court by a majority of 4:1 on the basis of the doctrine of mutual exclusivity of fundamental rights. This "unsound doctrine", as Sorabjee described it, held the field for two long decades after Nambyar argued for it to be rejected. The two other submissions were recorded by Justice Patanjali Sastri, as he was then. The barrister had argued that the expression "except according to procedure established by law" in Article 21 should implicitly include procedural due process. Chief Justice Lalit summarised, "Not just procedure established by law, but that the procedure must be a proper procedure. This is the second submission." Nambyar also argued that, in the words of Chief Justice Lalit, "Law within the meaning of Article 21 must be understood not in the sense of an enactment but signifying immutable and universal principles of natural justice." Both these submissions were rejected by a majority of five Judges in Gopalan, who proceed to place a narrow and restrictive meaning on the Article. Chief Justice also read out excerpts from the judgements of Justices B.K. Mukherjea and Sudhi Ranjan Das in Gopalan, both of whom went on to become the Chief Justice of India. Chief Justice Lalit observed that even though the five Judges forming the majority did not accept Nambyar's submissions, they were noted "in such extenso and with such appreciation and awe". The Chief Justice added, "Every submission has been noted with great respect. It is evident in the fact that they copiously mentioned everything." ...

'The Idea Of 'Basic Structure' Was Advocated For The First Time in India In Golaknath Case By Barrister M.K. Nambiar': Chief Justice UU Lalit

Awstika Das

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Awstika Das

'The Idea Of 'Basic Structure' Was Advocated For The First Time in India In Golaknath Case By Barrister M.K. Nambiar': Chief Justice UU Lalit

Awstika Das

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Awstika Das

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers