ATAM PRAKASH versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Citation: [1986] 1 S.C.R. 399 · Decided: 27-02-1986 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.N. BHAGWATI · Disposal: Case Allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

v. 
STATE OF BARYANA & ORS. 
FEBRUARY 27, 1986 
[P.N. BHAGWATI, C.J., 0. CHINNAPPA REDDY, R.B. MISRA, 
V. KHALID AND G.L. OZA, JJ.] 
399 
Punjab.Pre-emption Act 1913, as applicable in the State 
of Haryana, s. 15 - Whether constitutionally void. 
A 
B 
Interpretation of statutes - Provision of Conatitution 
C 
· sought to be interpreted or a statute whose constitutional 
validity is sought to be questioned - Interpretation that will 
promote march & Progress towards -a Socialistic Democratic 
State - To be given. 
Section 15 of ·the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 
1913 as 
applicable in the State of Haryana, incorporates the right of 
pre-emption based on conaanguinity. The petitioners challenged 
this right of pre-emption based on consanguinity under Art.32 
of the Conatitution on the ground that it offends Arts. 14 and 
15 of the Conatitution. It was contended on behalf of the 
respondent-State that the classification in f awur of the 
persona mentioned in section 15 has been made on reasonable 
basis . in the interests of the public: (i) to preserve inte-
grity of village comamity; (ii) to avoid fragmentation of 
holdings; (iii) to implement the agnatic theory of succession; 
• (iv) to promote public and private decency; (v) to facilitate 
tenants to acquire ownership rights; (vi) to reduce litigation 
consequent to introduction of an outsider on family property 
or jointly owned property. 
Allowing the writ petitions, 
llKID; 
l(i) 
There 
is 
no 
justification 
for 
the 
classification contained 
in section 
15 
of 
the 
Punjab 
Pre-emption Act of the kinafolk entitled to pre-emption •. The 
, 
right of pre-emption based on conaanguinity is a relic of the 
) •.feudal psst. It is totally inconsistent with modern ideas. The 
reasons which justified its recognition quarter of a century 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
400 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1986] 1 s.c.R. 
ago, namely, the preservation of the integrity of rural 
society, the unity of family life and the agnatic theory of )-
'
succession are today irrelevant, It is difficult to uphold the 
classification on the basis of unity and integrity of either 
the village co-111ity or the family or on the basis of the 
agnatic theory of succession which is again in a way connected 
with the integrity of the family. The list of kinsfolk 
mentioned 
as 
entitled 
to 
pre-emption 
i~ intrinsically 
defective and self-contradictory. There is, therefore, no 
reasonable classification and clauses 'First', 'Secondly' 
and / 
'Thirdly' of s. 15(l)(a), 'First', 'Secondly', and 'Thirdly' 
·• 
of s. 15(l)(b), clauses 'First', 'Secondly' and 'Thirdly' of 
s. 15(l)(c) and the whole of section 15(2) are, therefore, 
declared ultravires the Constitution. (419 E-H] 
1.2 Clause 'fourthly' of s. 15(l)(a), clauses 
'fourthly 
and fifthly' of s. 15(l)(b) and clause 'fourthly' o.f s. 15(1)~ 
(c) are valid and do not 'infringe either Art. 14 or 15 of the 
Constitution. [416 H; 417 A] 
2.1 Whether it is the Constitution that is expounded or 
the constitutional validity of a statute.that is considered, a r 
cardinal rule is to look to the Preamble to the Constitution 
as the guiding light and to the Directive Pri~ciples of State 
Policy as the Book of interpretation. The Preamble embodies 
and expresses the hopes and aspirations of the people. The 
Directive Principles set out proximate goals. At the time of 
examining statutes against the Constitution, it is through 
these glasses that the court must look, 
'distant vision' or 
'near vision'. 
The Constitution being sui-generis, where 
constitutional 
issues 
are 
under 
consideration, 
narrow 
interpretative rules which may have relevance when legislative 
enactments are interpreted may be misplaced. (411 D-F] 
2,2 In 1977 the 42nd amendment 
proclaimed India as a 
Socialist Republic. The word 'socialist' was introduced into 
the Preamble to the Constitution. The implication of the 
introduction of the word 'socialist' which has now become the 
centre of the hopes and aspirations of the people - a beacon 
to guide and inspire all that is enshrined in the articles of 
the Constitution - is clearly to set up a "vibrant throbbing 
socialist welfare society" in the place of a "Feudal exploited , 
society". When the Court considers the question whether irt 
ATAM PRAKASH v. STATE 
401 
statute offends Article 14 of the Constitution it must 
consider whether a classification that the 'legislature may 
have made is consistent with the socialist goal

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.