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

1952 Supreme(Mad) 162

CHANDRA REDDI


Advocates:
S. Mohan Kumaramangalam for the Petitioner.

Order.-

This application is by a member of the Legislative Council to call upon the respondent to show cause why a writ in the nature of Quo Warranto should not be issued against him to show by what authority he claims to be a member of the Madras Legislative Council. Through the medium of this writ, the applicant calls in question the validity of the nomination of the respondent made by His Excellency the Governor of Madras on the 31st March, 1952, in G.O. Ms. No. 1005, Public (Elections). The subject-matter of these proceedings runs as follows:

“In pursuance of clauses (3)(e) and (5) of Article 171 of the Constitution of India I, Sri Prakasa, Governor of Madras, hereby nominate the following persons to be members of the Madras Legislative Council:

(1) Sri Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari,

(2) Janab Mahammad Usman,

(3) Sri Vellapuram Bhashyam Aiyangar,

(4) Sri Omandur P. Ramaswami Reddiar.”

The applicant urges that this order nominating the respondent is invalid for two reasons: (1) that this is virtually a fraud of the powers conferred by the Constitution on the Governor, because the Governor by nominating the respondent wanted to assist the Congress Legislature Party; and (2) that the Gov


















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