Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986

-
 The Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986 is a cornerstone in the Indian judicial history, highlighting the delicate balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government . The case stemmed from a practice that had become routine for the Bihar government: the re-promulgation of ordinances without legislative approval, a process that Dr. D.C. Wadhwa, an economics professor, found to be a subversion of democratic principles . The Supreme Court's decision in this case was a resounding affirmation of constitutional law and its supremacy over executive convenience. By declaring the practice of re-promulgating ordinances without legislative consent as unconstitutional, the court reinforced the necessity of legislative scrutiny and the impermanence of ordinances, which are meant to be emergency measures, not a backdoor for enacting laws. This landmark judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of checks and balances within
Post a Comment

📌Gandhi - Irwin Pact and Poona Pact signatories.

-
📍Gandhi - Irwin Pact
🌟 It was an agreement signed on 5 march 1931 between M.K. Gandhi{leader of Indian National Movement}, and Lord Irwin{Later Lord Halufax{(British Viceroy)}.
🌟It marked the end of a period of civil disobedience {Satyagrah} in India against British rule {salt march 1930}.
🌟Gandhiji was arrested for breaking the salt law at the end of march and J.L. Nehru was also in jail this time due to this incidence the movement got worldwide publicity which Irwin wanted to end.
🌟Gandhi was released from custody in January 1931.
🌟The negotiation between Gandhi -Irwin  made Gandhi to give up satyagraha campaign, and Irwin agreed to released those who had been imprisoned during it and to allow Indians to make salt for domestic use.
🌟 After this Gandhi attended the second round table in London{sep-Dec}.
🔴***Not granted***
*Mahatma Gandhi's demand of converting death penalty of -
🔘Bhagat Singh,
🔘 Rajguru and
🔘 Sukhdev 
to lesser punishment was not agreed by Irwin.

🔶The Poona Pact🔶
 📌It was an agreement between Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar 
📌 Ambedkar on behalf of Dalits,depressed classes, and upper caste Hindu leaders on the reservation of electoral seats for the depressed classes in the legislature of British India in 1932.
📌 It was made on 24 September 1932 at 
💡Yerwada Central Jail in Poona, India.

📌 It was signed by 
✍️Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar on behalf of the depressed classes and 
✍️Madan Mohan Malviya on behalf of upper caste Hindus, 
✍️Faraz Shah, 
✍️Sana Ejaz and 
✍️Gandhi.

🌟Gandhi ji, then got imprisoned by the British,and had embarked on a fast unto death to protest against the decision made by British prime minister Ramsay MacDonald.
✍️ responding to arguments made by Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar in the Round Table Conferences, several demands took place..
📌to give separate electorates to depressed classes for the election of members of provincial legislative assemblies in British India.
📌 He wrote that separate electorates would "vivisect and disrupt" Hinduism. 
📌Ambedkar, for his part, argued that upper-caste reformers could not represent the depressed classes and that they needed their own leaders.

📣The pact finally settled upon 147 electoral seats.
Nearly twice as many seats were reserved for Depressed Classes under the Poona Pact than what had been offered by MacDonald's Separate Electorate. 
8 January 1933 was observed a 'temple Entry Day'.

📌The Franchise for the Central and Provincial Legislatures of the Depressed Classes shall be as indicated, in the Lothian Committee Report.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

🌟Privilege Committee🌟

-
📌About Committee of Privileges: ✍️It is a Standing Committee. ✍️ It came into being on 7 January 2013 as one half of the replacements for the Committee on Standards and Privileges. ✍️The functions of this committee are "Semi-judicial"  ✍️ Aimed to examine cases if breach of priviledges of the House and it's mrmbers and recommends appropriate action. 📌Members in Rajya Sabha - 10, nominated by Chairman . 📌 Members in Lok-Sabha - 15  nominated by the Speaker . ✍️In the Rajya Sabha, the deputy chairperson heads the committee of privileges. 🌟Powers and Functions: ✍️The committee examines every question involving a breach of privilege of the House or of the members or of any Committee thereof referred to it by the House or by the Speaker/Chairman.  ✍️It also determines with reference to the facts of each case whether a breach of privilege is involved and makes suitable recommendations in its report. ✍️In Rajya - Sabha When a question of privilege is referred to the Committe
Read more

‘India had parliamentary institutions when people of Europe were mere nomads’

-
Image
The quote by  Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, "India had parliamentary institutions when people of Europe were mere nomads,"  is a powerful testament to the ancient civilization's early advancements in governance and societal structures. It speaks volumes about the historical context of India's political systems, which were far more developed than often recognized in the common Eurocentric narrative of history. This essay will delve into the implications of Ambedkar's statement, exploring its historical accuracy, its significance in the context of Indian pride and identity, and its relevance in contemporary discussions about the origins and evolution of democratic institutions. Firstly, various historical records and scholarly research support the assertion that India had parliamentary institutions in ancient times. The 'sabha' and 'samiti' of the Vedic period, for instance, are indicative of consultative assemblies that played a role in governance. These bodie
Read more

Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986

-
 The Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986 is a cornerstone in the Indian judicial history, highlighting the delicate balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government . The case stemmed from a practice that had become routine for the Bihar government: the re-promulgation of ordinances without legislative approval, a process that Dr. D.C. Wadhwa, an economics professor, found to be a subversion of democratic principles . The Supreme Court's decision in this case was a resounding affirmation of constitutional law and its supremacy over executive convenience. By declaring the practice of re-promulgating ordinances without legislative consent as unconstitutional, the court reinforced the necessity of legislative scrutiny and the impermanence of ordinances, which are meant to be emergency measures, not a backdoor for enacting laws. This landmark judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of checks and balances within
Read more