Case Summary: Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar (2017)
Background of the Case
This case examined the constitutional validity of repeated promulgation of ordinances by the Governor of Bihar under Article 213 of the Constitution. The State had re-promulgated the same ordinance multiple times without placing them before the State Legislature. The petitioners challenged this as a fraud on the Constitution.
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=1048385
Law Points Raised
1. Whether ordinances must be mandatorily laid before the legislature under Article 213(2).
2. Whether re-promulgation of ordinances without placing them before the legislature is constitutional.
3. Whether ordinances confer enduring rights if not replaced by legislation.
4. Whether such executive action amounts to a fraud on the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi
The majority held that repeated re-promulgation of ordinances without legislative scrutiny violates constitutional principles and is a fraud on the Constitution.
Laying ordinances before the legislature is mandatory. Ordinances cease to have effect after the constitutionally specified period unless converted into law.
Final Ruling
The Supreme Court struck down the re-promulgated ordinances of the Bihar Government as unconstitutional. It held that enduring rights cannot be created through ordinances, and the failure to lay them before the legislature violates Article 213(2). Previous conflicting rulings were overruled.
Relevant Paragraph Numbers
- Background and facts: 1–5
- Interpretation of Article 213: 6–20
- Dissent by Justice Lokur: 1–21 (of dissent)
- Re-promulgation scrutiny: 30–60
- Final conclusions and overruling precedents: 110–115