Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1477 of 2020
Decided On : 13-01-2023
Jurisdiction - Law Commission - The court declined to entertain the petition seeking to make the Law Commission of India a statutory body, stating that issuing a writ to Parliament to enact a law pertains exclusively to the legislative domain.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a direction to the Union government to constitute the Twenty Second Law Commission of India and make the Law Commission a statutory body.
Finding of the Court:
The court declined to entertain the petition for making the Law Commission a statutory body, citing that issuing a writ to Parliament to enact a law pertains exclusively to the legislative domain.
Issues: Jurisdiction under Article 32, Writ of mandamus to Parliament, Relief sought for confiscating black money, benami properties, and disproportionate assets.
Ratio Decidendi: A writ cannot be issued to Parliament to enact a law as it pertains exclusively to the legislative domain.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of, and pending applications were also disposed of.
ORDER
1. Invoking the jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought a direction to the Union government to (i) take steps to constitute the Twenty Second Law Commission of India; and (ii) make the Law Commission a statutory body.
2. We have heard Mr Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, in-person and Mr R Venkataramani, Attorney General for India.
3. The Attorney General states that the Twenty Second Law Commission has been constituted by two notifications dated 9 and 10 November 2022.
4. The petitioner, as noted above, also seeks a direction 'to make Law Commission of India a statutory body'. Such a direction would necessarily implicate a writ of mandamus being issued to Parliament in its legislative capacity. It is a settled position of law that a writ cannot be issued to Parliament to enact a law. This pertains exclusively to the legislative domain. Hence, we decline to entertain the Petition for the subsequent part of the relief as claimed.
5. The final relief which is claimed in the Petition is for the Law Commission to prepare a report in the matter of confiscating black money, benami properties and disproportionate assets.
6. Mr Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay states that the relief as sought in prayer (c) is not pressed since the petitioner would independently pursue his request before the Law Commission.
7. The Petition shall accordingly stand disposed of.
8. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
The court cannot issue a writ to Parliament to enact a law as it pertains exclusively to the legislative domain.
No Constitutional Court can issue a writ of mandamus to a legislature to enact a law on a particular subject in a particular manner – Whether Law Commission should be given a status under Constitutio....
Mandamus issued directing disposal of statutory appeal after notice and enquiry per law.
Where a police enquiry into a complaint has already been completed and closed, the High Court will not grant a writ of mandamus to compel police action, but will grant liberty to the petitioner to fi....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
