CONSUMER EDUCATION & RESEARCH SOCIETY versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 13 S.C.R. 664 · Decided: 24-08-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
[2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 664 
CONSUMER EDUCATION & RESEARCH SOCIETY 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(WP(C) NO. 448 OF 2006) 
AUGUST 24, 2009 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI., R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND 
J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.] 
Parliament (Prevention of disqualification) Act, 1959 
' 
s. 3[as amended by Parliament (Prevention of 
Disqualification) Amendment Act, 2006] - Certain offices of 
profit not to disqualify - Addition to offices of profit with 
retrospective effect - Challenged - Held: The impugned 
0 
legislation is constitutionally valid - Power of Parliament to 
enact a law under Article 102(1)(a) of the Constitution includes 
the power to enact such law retrospectively - A law can be 
made retrospectively to remove the disqualification incurred 
on account of holding offices of profit - Which 'offices' should 
E 
be excluded for the purpose of disqualification is a matter to 
be addressed by Parliament - Nothing has been pointed out 
to suggest that any of the offices exempted under the 
Amendment Act, 2006 suffers from any impropriety so as to 
be prejudicial to the constituency or affect independence of 
the Member - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 101 to 
F 
104. 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Articles 101(3)(a), 102(1)(a) and 103(1) - Member of 
G Parliament -
Accepting 'office of profit' -
Incurring 
disqualification - Vacancy of seat - Held: A declaration by 
·~· 
the President of India under Article 103(1) in case of 
(; 
disqualification under Article 102(1) and a declaration by the 
Speaker or the Chairman under para 6 of the 10th Schedule 
H 
664 
CONSUMER EDUCATION & RESEARCH SOCIETY v. 665 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 
-""."-
in the case of disqualification under Article 102(2) is a 
A 
condition precedent for the vacancy of the seat -A Member 
continues as such until the decision of the President, and 
when the outcome of the decision is that he /she is disqualified 
, it relates back to the date when the said disqualification was 
incurred - Therefore, while a disqualification results in the 
B 
vacation of the seat of a Member, the vacancy occurs only 
when the President declares the disqualification under Article 
103 - In the instant case, when the Parliament (Prevention 
of Disqualification) Amendment Act, 2006 retrospectively 
removed the disqualification with regard to certain enumerated c 
offices, any Member who was holding such office of profit was 
freed from the disqualification retrospectively and as none of 
such Members have been declared to be disqualified, tf1ey 
continued as Members -
Parliament (Prevention of 
Disqualification) Act, 1959 - s. 3 [as amended by Parliament 
D 
(Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Act,_ 2006]. 
Article 102 - Disqualification of Members of Parliament 
- For holding of an office of profit - Exclusion of certain offices 
for purpose of disqualification - Held: Is a question that lies 
in the legislative domain - What kind of office would amount 
E 
to an 'office of profit' under the Government and whether such 
an office of profit is to be exempted is a matter to be 
-~) 
considered by Parliament. 
Article 14 - Challenge to the Parliament (Prevention of F 
Disqualification) Amendment Act, 2006 merely because 
several other similar offices of profit are not included in the 
exempted category, has no basis - Each office of profit may 
have different effects and consequences - Parliament 
(Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 as amended by G 
Amendment Act, 2006. 
CONSTITUTIONAL/SM: 
Constitutional conventions - Office of profit - Exemption 
of, from disqualification - Practice of matters being referred 
H 
666 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
( 
·""-· 
A to Joint Committee - Held: This was merely a parliamentary 
procedure and not a constitutional convention - Once 
Parliament is recognized as having the power to exempt from 
disqualification and to do so with retrospective effect, any 
alleged violation of any norm or traditional procedure cannot 
B denude Parliament of its power to make a law. 
The instant writ petitions were filed challenging the 
constitutional validity of the Parliament (Prevention of 
Disqualification) Amendment Act, 2006, amending the 
c Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification} Act, 1959 and 
making additions to the list of 'Offices of Profit', exempt 
from disqualification for becoming a Member of 
Parliament. 
The questions for consideration before the Court 
D were : (i) whether the Amendment Act retrospect

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