SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Bom) 33

G.F.COUTO, G.D.KAMAT
Manohar S. Prabhu & Uday Bhembre – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & others – Respondent


Judgment

G.F. COUTO, J.:---The constitutional validity of section 4 of the Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment) Act, 1962, as well as of sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963, and of the Notification No. 110123/85-UTL issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, on 16th January, 1985 is being assailed in these two writ petitions filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India. The grounds of challenge in both the writ petitions are the same, as same are the reliefs sought. Hence this common judgment.

2. Section 3 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963, hereinafter referred to as ""the Act"", provides that there shall be a Legislative Assembly for each Union territory and that the total number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of a Union territory to be filled by persons chosen by direct election shall be forty in the case of the Union territory of Himachal Pradesh and thirty in the case of any other Union territory. Its sub-section (3) postulates that the Central Government may nominate not more then three persons, not being persons in the service of Government, to be members of the Legislative Assembly of a














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top