N.V.RAMANA, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, R.SUBHASH REDDY, B.R.GAVAI, SURYA KANT
SHAH FAESAL – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
The paragraph that states that a high court exercises power over its own territory only is the one that discusses the scope of judicial authority and the importance of judicial decisions in maintaining legal certainty and stability. It emphasizes that decisions are binding within the context of the case and the particular facts, and that the principle of precedent is fundamental to ensuring consistency and confidence in the legal system. This paragraph underscores that each court's authority is limited to its jurisdiction and that decisions are applicable to the parties involved and the specific circumstances of the case, rather than extending beyond its territorial or jurisdictional boundaries (!) .
ORDER
1. These cases pertain to the constitutional challenge before this Court as regards to two Constitution Orders issued by the President of India in exercise of his powers under Article 370 of the Constitution of India.
2. At the outset, learned senior counsel appearing for one of the Petitioners in W.P. (C) No. 1013/19 and Petitioner in W.P. (C) 1368/19 raised the contention that the present matter needs to be referred to a larger Bench as there were contrary opinions by two different Constitution Benches on the interpretation of Article 370 of the Constitution. This order is confined to the limited preliminary issue of whether the matter should be referred to a larger Bench. We have not considered any issue on the merits of the dispute.
3. A brief introduction to the issue to set the context for this order is that after the late Maharaja of Kashmir had entered into a treaty of accession with the Indian State, Article 370 was incorporated into the Indian Constitution, which states as follows:
370. Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir
(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,—
(a) the provisions of article 238 shall not apply in relation to t
Prem Nath Kaul v. State of Jammu and Kashmir
Sampat Prakash v. State of Jammu and Kashmir
Mohd. Maqbool Damnoo v. State of Jammu and Kashmir
State Bank of India v. Santosh Gupta
Chandra Prakash v. State of U.P.
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi
Union of India v. Dhanwanti Devi
Sundeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra
Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corpn. Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Chandigarh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.