Article 13 (judicial review relating to fundamental rights) article 13 gives scope to judiciary to review the law relating to fundamental rights pass by the competent authority of the state.
13 Clause (1) states that all laws in force shall be invalid to the extent to which the conflict with the fundamental rights.
13 clause (2) prohibits the state from making any law that take away or abridge any of the fundamental rights.
13 clause (3a) alternative terms for law.
the supreme court held different view regarding the validity of ordinary law and constitutional law when they are in conflict with the fundamental rights in the dispute between shankari Prasad vs Union of India in 1951 and the sajjan Singh vs State of Rajasthan in 1856 the supreme court made a distinction between an ordinary law and constitutional law in act under the article 368, according to the supreme court and ordinary law become invalid when its conflict with the fundamental rights but when constitutional law conflict with the fundamental rights it will not become invalid but in 1967 the supreme court give a different decision in the case of golak nath vs the state of Punjab it is observed that the both ordinary and constitutional laws should not conflict with fundamental rights.
In 1971 a Constitution amendment was made to article 13. A new clause 4 to article 13 was added by 24th amendment in 1971.
13 article (4) nothing in this article shall applied to any amendment of this constitution made under article 368.
#eduofficial #article13 #delhiuniversity #politicalscience
0 Comments