1964 Supreme(AP) 136

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : GOPALA KRISHNAN NAIR
V.Ramachandra Rao - Appellant
Versus
A.P. Regional Committee - Respondent
Decided On : 07-24-64

The proceedings of a legislative committee cannot be invalidated on the ground of irregularity of procedure if the committee has substantially complied with the rules and procedures governing its functioning.

Headnote:

REGIONAL COMMITTEE - ANDHRA PRADESH - VALIDITY OF PROCEEDINGS - NOTICE TO MEMBERS - BYE-LAW 4 - ARTICLE 212 OF THE CONSTITUTION - PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS - ARTICLE 194 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION - ARTICLE 371 (1) OF THE CONSTITUTION - ARTICLE 200 OF THE CONSTITUTION - RULE 147-A OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY RULES - RULE 51 OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH GOVERNMENT BUSINESS RULES AND SECRETARIAT INSTRUCTIONS - INTERPRETATION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who are five members of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly, seek a declaration that the proceedings of the Andhra Pradesh Regional Committee, dated 10-7-1964 at the 19th Meeting are null and void and further ask for an order of direction under Art. 226 of the Constitution to compel the Chairman of the said Committee to convene a fresh Meeting of the Committee after issuing proper notice to all the Members thereof including the petitioners for considering the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Amendment Bill, 1964 which had been referred to it by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the proceedings of the Regional Committee were not invalidated by the absence of notice to the petitioners, as the mode prescribed in the proviso to R. 35 was sufficient to give valid intimation to the Members of the Regional Committee of the date and place of the meeting of the Committee. The Court further held that the Regional Committee was only an agency or instrument through which the Legislature functions and that its proceedings were in substance and effect the proceedings of the Legislature itself. Therefore, the validity of the proceedings of the Regional Committee could not be called in question on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure under Art. 212 (1) of the Constitution. The Court also held that the House of Commons enjoys certain privileges and immunities, including the right to regulate its own internal proceedings, and that these privileges are preserved to the Houses of the State Legislatures under Art. 194 (3) of the Constitution. Therefore, the Court could not interfere with the proceedings of the Regional Committee or the Legislative Assembly on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure.

Issues: 1. Whether the proceedings of the Regional Committee were invalidated by the absence of notice to the petitioners? 2. Whether the Regional Committee was a separate House of the Legislature or a necessary component part of the State Legislature? 3. Whether the Court could interfere with the proceedings of the Legislature in the formative stages of an enactment?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The mode prescribed in the proviso to R. 35 was sufficient to give valid intimation to the Members of the Regional Committee of the date and place of the meeting of the Committee. 2. The Regional Committee was only an agency or instrument through which the Legislature functions and that its proceedings were in substance and effect the proceedings of the Legislature itself. 3. The House of Commons enjoys certain privileges and immunities, including the right to regulate its own internal proceedings, and that these privileges are preserved to the Houses of the State Legislatures under Art. 194 (3) of the Constitution.

Final Decision: The Writ Petition and the C. M. P. fail and they are dismissed with costs.