Constitutional Law: rights, writs and language
What is tested
Constitutional Law examines Parts III to VI of the Constitution, the writ jurisdiction of the Gujarat High Court, and the constitutional treatment of language - the last connecting directly to the translation paper.
Rules that recur
- Article 12 defines 'State'; Article 13 makes inconsistent pre-constitutional law void to that extent.
- Article 14: classification needs intelligible differentia and a rational nexus; legislation may also fall on manifest arbitrariness (Shayara Bano, 2017).
- Article 19 freedoms are subject to the reasonableness standards in Articles 19(2)–(6).
- Article 21 requires a fair, just and reasonable procedure (Maneka Gandhi, 1978); privacy is a fundamental right (Puttaswamy, 2017).
- Article 226 is wider than Article 32: it covers any legal right, and reaches a cause of action arising wholly or partly in the territory (Article 226(2), Fifteenth Amendment, 1963). An alternative remedy is not an absolute bar (Whirlpool, 1998).
- Article 348: High Court proceedings are in English; Article 348(2) lets the Governor, with the President's previous consent, authorise Hindi or the State's official language. Article 210 permits the State legislature to transact business in Gujarati.
- Basic structure (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973) limits Article 368.
Worked example
An Ahmedabad firm's licence is cancelled by a Union ministry order served in New Delhi. The Gujarat High Court can hear an Article 226 petition because part of the cause of action - service of the order and its business effect - arises in Gujarat. Article 32 is narrower: it lies only for enforcement of fundamental rights, not for every legal right.
Traps
Treating Article 226 as confined to fundamental rights; confusing Articles 226 and 227; assuming a right to argue in Gujarati in the High Court without Article 348(2) authorisation; treating delay as an automatic bar.