The Constitution of United Consortium of

Ganges

PART – I
THE UNION AND ITS TERRITORIES

1. Name and territory of the Union. – (1) Ganges, that is Gangotrinagar,

shall be a Union of States.
(2) The States and territories thereof shall be as specified in the First
Schedule.
(3) The territory of Ganges shall comprise –
(a) The territories of the States;
(b) The Union Territories specified in the First Schedule, and
(c) such other territories as may be acquired.
2. Admission or establishment of new States. – The Parliament may by
law admit into the Union, or establish, new States on such terms and
conditions as it thinks fit.
Provided that any bill for this purpose shall only be introduced in the House
of Administrators and not the House of Directors. The bill, after being
introduced in the House of Administrators shall take its ordinary course as
prescribed by law.
Provided that no bill for this purpose shall be introduced in the House of
Administrators except on the recommendation of the Queen.
3. Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or
names of existing States. – Parliament may by law –
(a) Form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by
uniting two or more States or parts of States or by uniting any territory
to a part of any State;
(b) Increase the area of any State;
(c) Diminish the area of any State;
(d) Alter the boundaries of any State;
(e) Alter the name of any State.
Provided that any bill for this purpose shall only be introduced in the
House of Administrators and not the House of Directors. The bill, after
 being introduced in the House of Administrators shall take its ordinary
course as prescribed by law.
4. Laws made under articles 2 and 3 to provide for the amendment of
the First and the Fourth Schedules and supplemental, incidental and
consequential matters. – No law made under article 2 and 3 shall be
deemed to be an amendment under article 368.
Explanation: For the purpose of passing laws made under article 2 and
3, only simple majority in each of the houses of Parliament is required.

PART II
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
5. Definition – In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, “the
State” includes the Government which constitutes the Administrators,
Directors, Vice-President, President, Queen, The Mother of Nation and
the Father of Nation and the Parliament and all local or other authorities
within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of
Ganges.
6. Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights –
(1) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the
rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this
clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.
(2) In this article, unless the context otherwise requires, “law” includes
any ordinance, order including royal order, bye-law, rule, regulation,
notification, custom or usage having in the territory of Ganges the force
of law.
(3) Nothing in this article shall apply to any constitutional amendment
made under article 368.
7. Equality before Law. - The State shall not deny to any person equality
before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of
Ganges.
8. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex
or place of birth. – (1) The State shall not discriminate against any
citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any
of them.
 (2) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special
provision for women and children.
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special
provisions for any socially or educationally backward communities, tribes
or castes for their social and educational upliftment.
(4) Nothing in this article shall prevent appropriate authority of the State
from making any law prescribing, in regard to a class or classes of
employment or appointment to an office under the Government of, or any
local or other authority within, a State or Union territory, any requirement
as to residence within that State or Union territory prior to such
employment or appointment.
(5) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any law which
provides that the incumbent of an office in connection with the affairs of
any religious or denominational institution or any member of the
governing body thereof shall be a person professing a particular religion
or belonging to a particular denomination.
Explanation: By virtue of this clause, all the posts like of the Queen,
Mother of Nation, Father of Nation, President, Vice-President, Royal
Judge of Honour and that of Archbishop (Godfather) are not open for the
general public.
9. Abolition of Untouchability. – “Untouchability” is abolished and its
practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability
arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence punishable in
accordance with law.
10. Right to freedom. – (1) All citizens shall have the right –
(a) To freedom of speech and expression;
(b) To assemble peacefully and without arms;
(c) To form associations or unions;
(d) To move freely throughout the territory of Ganges;
(e) To reside and settle in any part of the territory of Ganges; and
(f) To practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or
business.
(2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of
any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as
such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right
conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and
integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign
 States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of
court, defamation or incitement to an offence.
(3) Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from
making any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity
of Ganges or public order, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the
right conferred by the said sub-clause.
(4) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from
making any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity
of Ganges or public order or morality, reasonable restrictions on the
exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause.
(5) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation
of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from
making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public,
reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said
sub-clause, and, in particular, nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect
the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the
State from making any law relating to,—

(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any

profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or

(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled

by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the
exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise.
(11) Protection in respect of conviction for offences. - (1) No person
shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at
the time of the commission of the Act charged as an offence, nor be
subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted
under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more
than once.
(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself.
In the

ROYAL COURT OF HONOUR

BUCKINGHAM PALACE

Mr. Ajay Kumar v the Crown

Bench: Full Bench

Judgement

In this judgement, the petitioner through this writ petition under Article 32 has
sought to assail the decision of Her Majesty expelling him from the office of
Lieutenant Governor General vide Royal Order 3456/2020.

The issue before this bench is whether the court can discuss and then adjudicate
any matter which relates to the Crown’s decision in her personal and
executive’s capacity.

The law on this aspect is somewhat shrouded in convoluted mysteries of

traditions and various provisions of Constitution of Ganges. Article 23 says:

“(1) The courts shall not have any jurisdiction to discuss the matter related to
actions of Queen in office.”

In Article 45, the Constitution establishes various courts viz. Supreme Court,
High Courts and Subordinate judiciary. Article 45 says: “The judicial system
shall include of Supreme Court at national level, High Courts at state level, and
Subordinate courts at district level. The jurisdiction of each court shall be as
provided under the provisions of Constitution.”

Article 233 is important as it recognises Royal Court of Honour over and above
the judicial system under Article 45. Article 233 says, “Notwithstanding any of
the aforesaid provisions, the Royal Court of Honour which historically has been
the Queen’s Bench or King’s Court shall continue with the entire jurisdiction
which it traditionally has.”

Now, with all the three articles to be interpreted together, it seems that since
Article 233 which recognises Royal Court of Honour’s wide jurisdiction which
it traditionally has, it means that the jurisdiction of this court cannot be
restricted under any provision of the Constitution, not even Article 23.
However, it shall remain to be seen what the traditions of RCH tell about its
jurisdiction.

For traditions of this court, we must dwell into the practice of this court since
antiquity. There have been instances in past when this court presided earlier by
Her Majesty herself was completely free to take any matter having a legal or
constitutional dispute under its adjudicatory lens. We are aware of the situation
that due to the Constitutional Amendment the 190th, the Queen has been
disassociated from decision making process.

Nevertheless, the court’s traditions must continue and therefore we think that
notwithstanding the Queen being the nominal head of judiciary, we must hold
that the jurisdiction of this court is unfettered. While we must also cautiously
hold that this court must exercise uttermost caution and judicial restraint while
taking up cases and not encroaching upon the jurisdiction of the courts below.
This court has traditionally been only for deciding the questions of very high
constitutional importance or public importance. Thus, we again hold that this
court’s wide jurisdiction is restricted to only questions which include crucial
constitutional interpretations and public importance.

We see that this decision falls into this ambit. Therefore, we accept the petition.

Now, coming to the merits of this case, since the Royal Order being an
administrative order it is an administrative proceeding which must follow the
Principle of Natural Justice. In this case, the Crown did not follow audi alteram
partem and therefore, the Royal Order is liable to be struck down.

Therefore, we hold that the Order was wrong in law as it was against the basic
principles of administrative laws. The Order shall be void ab initio and the LGG
is reinstated in his position.

Further, the Viceroy is directed to pay compensation to LGG to an amount of

1.5*his one month’s salary from the State’s account for Royal Palace.