Advocates:
A.K.SHARMA, ARVIND SHUKLA, B.P.SINGH, LAKSHMI ARVIND, M.S.Gupta, O.P.RANA, P.K.JAIN, P.R.MRIDUL, Prakash Gupta, S.K.Gupta, SUKUMAR SAHU, Veda Vyasa

The judgment describes the Sixth Schedule as a "Constitution within a Constitution," emphasizing its autonomous and fundamental status within the broader constitutional framework (!) . It highlights that the provisions and powers under the Sixth Schedule are integral to the constitutional order and must be exercised within its constitutional limits (!) .

Furthermore, the judgment interprets the powers granted under Paragraph 2(6) of the Sixth Schedule as enabling the Council to make rules concerning the "constitution of District Councils" (!) . This includes aspects related to the "conduct" and "disqualification" of members, provided these rules are aimed at ensuring stability, proper functioning, and integrity of the councils (!) .

The decision underscores that such rules should be consistent with the overarching constitutional principles and should serve the purpose of maintaining order without infringing upon fundamental rights or the core principles of governance established by the Schedule (!) . It also indicates that rules exceeding these boundaries or undermining democratic processes could be challenged as beyond the scope of the Council’s constitutional authority (!) .

In sum, the judgment affirms that the Sixth Schedule grants a broad yet constitutionally bounded authority to regulate internal matters of District Councils, including conduct and disqualification of members, as long as such regulations align with the fundamental constitutional principles (!) .