Important Doctrine of Constitution _____________________________

**Doctrine of Severability

It provides that only that part of the law will be declared invalid which is inconsistent with the
fundamental rights and the rest of the law will stand. However, invalid part of the law will be
severed only if it is severable, i.e., if after separating the invalid part, the valid part is capable of
giving effect to the legislatures intent, then only it will survive otherwise the court shall declare the
entire law as invalid.

**Doctrine of Waiver of Right

It provides that a person has the liberty to waive the enjoyment of such rights as are conferred on
him by the state, provide that such person must have the knowledge of his rights and the waiver
should be voluntarily, However, citizens cannot waive of any of the fundamental rights

>>which article of the constitution of india is related to doctrine of eclipse? what is it all about?
article 13 It provides that a law made before the commencement of the constitution remains
eclipsed or dormant to be extent in comes under the shadow of fundamental rights i.e. is
inconsistency brought about by the fundamental rights is removed by the amendment to the
Constitution of India

>>Doctrine of Pith and Substance ...write abt it

*this principle was applied by the SC in 2 separate cases - Prafulla Kumar Vs. Bank of Khulna and
State of Bombay Vs. Balsara

Ques. 7 : What is doctrine of Eclipse and how does it applies to Part III of the Indian
Constitution?
Ans. The doctrine says that a law that is overridden by a subsequent law does not cease to
exist. It only goes into dormancy. Once the overriding law is diluted or deleted, the earlier law
comes into operation. For example, a pre-Constitution law goes into eclipse as the
Constitution comes into effect and overrules it. When the Constitution is amended allowing
the pre-Constitution law to re-surface, it comes out of eclipse. It does not apply to the post-
Constitutional laws as they become null and void from inception if they contradict the
Constitution. The doctrine applies to Fundamental Rights (Part III). If a pre-Constitutional law
is inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights, it goes into eclipse. But a post-Constitution law
is void ab initio and the question of going into eclipse does not arise.

DOCTRINE OF SEVERABILITY

The doctrine of severability means severing part of a statute which is inconsistent with any of the
constitutional provisions and particularly the provisions contained under the chapter of fundamental
rights in the Indian Constitution. The other part of the severed statute is to remain valid.
The Supreme Court of India has considered the doctrine of severability in various cases such as the
A.K. Gopalans Case.

The apex court of India, Supreme Court has summarised the rules relating to doctrine of severability
as follows:

(1) The intention of the legislature Is a factor whether the legislature enacted that law, knowing fully
well that the rest of the statute is invalid - to determine whether valid parts are separable or not.

(2) If valid and invalid are so inextricably mixed up, the whole law is declared valid.

(3) If valid and invalid form part of a single scheme, the whole law is declared invalid.

(4) After omitting, the invalid part, if what remain is very thin and what emerges out is something
different, then the entire law is declared invalid.

DOCTRINE OF ECLIPSE

The Doctrine of Eclipse in constitutional law stands for over-shadowing any provision of a statute by
the fundamental rights contained in Part-III of the Indian Constitution.

24

In 1955, Supreme Court of India in the case of B. Narain vs. the State of MP has introduced the
Doctrine of Eclipse and stated - that if any law is not consistent with any provision of the
fundamental right then such law would be overshadowed by the fundamental right and it will
remain dormant but it will no to be dead altogether.

This dormant statute whole or any of its part will become operative as a valid law when the shadow
cast by the fundamental right is removed by a subsequent amendment.

The Constitution of India in Article 13(1) states that all laws enforced in India immediately before
the commencement of the constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with any or all fundamental
rights shall be valid to the extent of such inconsistency.

The Supreme Court of India in its earlier decisions had applied the doctrine of eclipse only to pre-
consfitutlonal laws but later on in the case of the state of Gujarat vs. Shri Ambika Mills (1974). It
stated that the doctrine can be extended to the post constitutional laws as well.
The different stages in the legislative procedure in the Parliament-

(a) Introduction of the Bill. The first stage of legislation is the introduction of a Bill. After the Bill has
been introduced in the house it is published in the Gazette of India. The introduction of the bill and
its publication in the Gazette constitutes the First reading of the Bill. (b) Second reading of the Bill-
At this stage the bill is discussed in thoroughness. There are different courses of action open at the
second stage; (1) the bill may be taken into consideration at once; (2) the Bill may be referred to a
Select committee or a Joint committee of the House (3) the bill may be circulated for the purpose of
eliciting public opinion on it. (c) Third reading of the Bill. This is the final reading which is more or
less a formal affair.

After the bill has been accepted by the House it is deemed to have been passed by the House. It is
then transmitted to the other House where it has to pass through the same process. The other
House has four alternatives before it. These are:

(1) It may pass the bill with no amendment. In that case the bill will be deemed to have been
passed by both houses. (2) It may pass the bill with amendments. In this case, the bill will be
returned to the originating House. If the House which originated the bill accepts the bill as
amended by the other House, it will be deemed to have been passed by both Houses.
However if the originating house does not agree to the amendments made by the other
House and if there is final disagreement as to the amendments between the two Houses the
President may summon a joint sitting of the two Houses to resolve the deadlock (3) It may
reject the bill altogether. Then the President may under Art 108 summon a joint sitting to
resolve the deadlock; (4) It may take no action on the Bill by keeping it lying on its table. In
such a case if more than six months elapse from the date of reception of the bill, then it is
deemed that there this a deadlock between the two Houses and the President may summon
a joint sitting of the Parliament.

SPECIAL PROCEDURE WITH RESPECT TO FINANCIAL BILL

A financial bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha, that too on the recommendations of the
President. However the Rajya Sabha has equal powers to reject or amend it. The President may also
send a financial bill for the reconsideration of the Parliament once.

Vacating Procedure of Seats:

Resignation, addressed to presiding officer, with their own handwriting. Seat is said to be
vacant if a member is continuously absent for 60 days to the proceeding of the house without prior
permission of president officer. Having deal membership in both the houses a) Member
of one house subsequently elected to other house, he has to give his intent within 14days else the
membership of former house is deemed to be vacant. b) If a candidate is elected to both the
houses at a time, he has to opt his intent within 41 days. In such cases membership of R.S is vacant.
c) If he is elected from 2 constituencies simultaneous he has to exercise his option within 10 days
else both are assumed to be vacant. As a rule, no candidate is allowed to contest in more than 2.
d) If he is elected for parliament and assembly, he has to resign to assembly else the membership
of parliament is deemed to be vacant. If a member is expelled from the house. If an MP
or MLA is elected as President or as Governor, seat is deemed to be vacant.