ORDER :- The Iyer coined "Bharati Ghost" (Bhim Singhji's case (AIR 1981 SC 234)) is haunting the corridors of this Court now, brandishing broken and smashed sword of Golak Nath (AIR 1967 SC 1643) a Girijan (Scheduled Tribe) is attacking the 45th amendment (D.D. Bssu's Shorter Constitution of India, p.807, Eighth Edn. The Constitution (Forty-fifth Amendment) Act, 1980) for giving a decisive death-blow to Art.334 of the Constitution. Vichitra, the petitioner, little realises the distinction between homicide and suicide. The billion dollar question is his success in striking down the reservations, whether would be disaster for the Girijans and failure may result in blessings in disguise.

2. The razor-thin distinction between photo finish race of homicide v. suicide by Vichitra, may become too obscure to be spelled out or to be observed even by a microscope, if the fatal writ issued for alleged paralysation of parliamentary function of "reservations" or special reservations.

3. Visualising perhaps the above situation, the eminent Justice Krishna Iyer gave the following warning which if not true in Bhim Singhji's case (AIR 1981 SC 234) (supra), is much more true now in Vichitra's case:-

"To permit the Bharati Ghost to haunt the corridors of the court brandishing fatal writs for every feature of inequality is judicial paralysation of Parliamentary function."

4. Even when Kesavanand Bharati, AIR 1973 SC 1461 was in womb determined to kill and smash Golaknath, like "Krishna Avtar" for 'Kansa' and to damage and demolish its dimensions, Mishra and Ray, JJ. (Basudev Khadanga v. U.O.I. (AIR 1973 Orissa 136)) repelled challenge to 23rd amendment and killed a still-born theme of Vichitra.

5. Effort of Golaknath to take rebirth after being killed by Kesavanand Bharati could not succeed in Minerva Mills' case AIR 1980 SC 1789, Waman-rao's case, AIR 1981 SC 271 and in Bhim Singhji's case (AIR 1981 SC 234) (supra) Vichitra, petitioner, however, takes inspiration from stray deduction of a jurist (Dr. S.R. Bhansali, Associate Prof. (Law), University of Raj Jaipur "Essential Features of the Basic Structure of Indian Constitution". 1982) wherein he observed as under :-

" A Walnut tree planted by Golaknath in the Supreme Court was threatened by a storm brought by Kesavanand Bharati, but the same is now being nourished by the Minerva Mills in the hope that the posterity will enjoy the fruits."

6. Ever-increasing expansion of reservation term from 10 to 20, 20 to 30, and 30 to 40 by amendment of Art.334 whether demolishes, essential features of the basic structure of the Constitution, as alleged by Vichitra Meena, a Girijan, Scheduled Tribe student of Law, who has exhibited his enthusiasm, for protecting his fundamental right of equality of opportunity and equality before law, is the pivot or ex parte constitutional debate in this writ petition.

7. Descending from Constitution planet of the moon, down to the earth, now the traditional facts. Vichitra, the petitioner belongs to Meena Segment of Scheduled Tribe of Rajasthan. A citizen of India and student of law. Vichitra, has filed this 'Vichitra' writ petition, which is 'Vichitra' in several ways.

8. The extraordinary prayer for re-election throughout India of all legislatures in States and Lok Sabha, is coached in very simple ordinary language of the following prayer clause:-

"It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that the 45th and other allied amendment of the Constitution of India Acts may kindly be declared null and void and immediate re-elections in all the constituencies be ordered and the by-elections being held on 19-5-1982, be stayed till the disposal of this writ petition.

The Dausa and Veir Constituencies may kindly be declared as, general constituencies with immediate effect, inter alia other reserved constituencies.

That the petitioner may kindly be granted all the costs of the writ petition and necessary legal aid in view of the public importance of the case."

9. It appears that he has drafte