NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, DELHI

B.A.LL.B.(HONS.), III-YEAR, VI-SEMESTER (Batch of 2017)

Online Open Book Assessment (End-Semester), July/August-2020

Paper 6.2: Constitutional Law-II

Time: 72 Hours Total Marks: 20

Instructions:
1. Read the questions carefully and answer.
2. No clarification can be sought on the question paper.
3. The word limit should not be more than 2000 words.

Q.1 Manu Ghayal (MG) became the youngest member of Parliament at the age of 26 years and every
election thereafter, he continued winning by defeating his rival party candidates. Due to his hard
work in his constituency in the State of Dakshin Pradesh (DP), Party projected him as a dependable
and mature leader and he was also made President of the state wing of his party Swayam Bhartiya
Party (SBP). In the recent elections in 2019, SBP projected him as their Chief Ministerial candidate.
After winning the elections with huge margin, MG again became an MP on the seat of SBP in
2019. But SBP elected Mr. Kamta Prasad (KP), an old parliamentarian as their leader and made
him the Chief Minister and MG was made Deputy Chief Minister of the State of Dakshin Pradesh
(DP). In spite of his resentment and reservation, MG accepted the post of Deputy Chief Minister
and cooperated in all kinds of working in the State governance. But the differences between KP and
MG were quite evident from the beginning itself. Ultimately, the rivalry turned into a bitter power
tussle between the two with MG claiming that his authority was being repeatedly undermined by
KP. There were frequent run-ins between the two. The SBP and its central leadership was aware of
the differences between the two but ignored it. The turning point came when MG received a notice
from the special investigation group (SIG) of the Central Investigation Bureau(CIB) to record his
statement regarding the alleged cases of corruption in the State of DP, which he considered a move
to humiliate and undermine his authority by KP. MG rushed to the Party central leadership and
tendered his resignation. In an emergency meeting convened by the SBP central leadership, MG
was sacked and he was removed from the posts of deputy chief minister and as the state president
of SBP.

MG joined another national party at the center namely Indian National Party (INP). SBP has asked
the speaker of Lok Sabha to initiate proceedings against MG for defecting SBP and remove him
from his membership of the present Lok Sabha seat or contest fresh elections on the seat of newly
joined INP.

Argue for MG and decide whether he can retain his membership of present Lok Sabha as per
Schedule X of the Indian Constitution or not. (5 Marks)

Q.2 Ram Chander and Sons is a partnership firm of qualified lawyers, which takes up cases for private
individuals as well as public sector undertakings. This partnership firm was also representing the
government of Delhi in the various High Courts of the country as well as in the Supreme Court of
India. Mr. Ram Chander, one of the partners of the firm, won an election to the Delhi Legislative
Assembly and became an MLA. But his election was challenged on the ground that he was holding
an office of profit under the Government, as the Government was exercising indirect control over
the firm and was also responsible for giving general directions to it both in its capacity as a client of
the firm as well as in the capacity of professional regulation over Mr. Ram Chander as a practicing
lawyer. On this basis, it was claimed that he was not qualified for becoming a Member of State
Legislative Assembly.

Discuss with the help of decided case law. (5 Marks)

P.T.O.
Q.3 The National Judicial Appointments Commission Bill, 2020 has proposed 6 member commission
for the appointment of judges in the higher judiciary which includes Prime Minister and Law
Minister of India, Chief Justice of India along with the senior most Supreme Court judge along with
2 active members from the civil society or 2 eminent jurists or 2 credible members from the all
India civil services, out of which one women should be there, if possible.

In the light of decided cases and keeping in mind that many attempts to constitute judicial
commission has already failed, critically analyse whether this judicial commission can sustain and
pass the test of judicial scrutiny by the Supreme Court of India or not? (6 Marks)

Q.4 In 2003, the Punjab Legislature passed the Punjab Public Men (Prevention of Corruption) Act. This
State Act was passed after obtaining the assent of the President of India. Central legislations viz.
Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 carrying similar provisions were
there in force and dealt with similar kinds of offences.

Apply doctrine of repugnancy as given under Article 254 of the Indian Constitution and decide
whether both State and Central Act can co-exist or not, in case both have consistent provisions or
one legislation has to be repealed or be void, if inconsistent to the other and to the extent of that
inconsistency. (4 Marks)