This rough draft is submitted for the partial fulfilment of the course of

Constitutional Law II of B.A. L.L.B (Hons.)

CRITICAL APPRAISED OF STATE OF KARNAKTAKA V

UINION OF INDIA

Submitted To: Submitted By:

Prof. Dr. Anirudh Prasad Md Jafar Ekbal

Professor of law Roll NO- 2337

6th Sem B.A. L.L.B.

2ND FEBRUARY 2023

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYA NAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA-800001

1|P ag e
 INTRODUCTION
Under the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court is the guardian of the Constitution and
Fundamental Rights. Thus, for any kind of violation of our Fundamental Rights, the aggrieved
can directly approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. But in matters
concerning disputes between States or between the Centre and the State, Article 131 of the
Constitution provides the Supreme court with the jurisdiction to resolve the matter. Thus, while
Article 32 confers upon the Court original jurisdiction, Article 131 confers original and exclusive
jurisdiction.

Disputes under Article 131 of the Constitution can be taken up by the Court only when there
arises a question of law or fact. It is also based on the extent of legal right involved.However, the
questions arises as to what constitutes a legal right and who can be parties in a suit under Article
131. The Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. UOI, filled the ambiguity and outlined the
scope of Article 131 and also laid down the foundation for addressing centre-state disputes.

In this case, the Karnataka Government challenged Section 3 of the Commission of Inquiry Act,
1952 which authorized the Central Government to constitute a judicial inquiry against the
Ministers on the State including the Chief Minister. The State contended on the grounds of
federalism and the scheme of the Constitution. It was argued that under Article 164(2) of the
Constitution, the State Cabinet was collectively responsible for the State Legislative Assembly
and not to the Centre. The Supreme Court did not approve the contentions made by the state and
held that the distinction between the State and the State Government was immaterial in this
context, thus the validity of the Act in question was upheld.

Even though the suit was dismissed, the maintainability of the suit was upheld by 4:3 majority.
While holding the suit maintainable, the then Chief Justice of India, MH Beg stated that “When
differences arise between the representatives of the state and those the whole people of India on a
question of interpretation of the Constitution, which affects the welfare of the people, and,
particularly that of the people of the State concerned, Article 131 can be invoked”. On the other
hand, Justice PN Bhagwati held that Article 131 can be invoked even when there is no
infringement of any legal right of the State and traditional concepts like the cause of action
which apply to civil suits, do not necessarily apply under Article 131. The scope and jurisdiction
guaranteed to the Supreme Court under Article 131 is extremely wide and gives original
jurisdiction to the Court in any disputes unless the Constitution expressly excludes such
jurisdiction under certain circumstances.

2|P ag e
 HYPOTHESIS
Art.131 does not prohibit the State from suing Central government to protect the Ministers or to
make its own claim of exclusive power to question the actions of a Minister. Thus, since the suit
addresses a question of legal right of the State, it is maintainable under Art.131.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this project my research methodology is not an empirical one but analytical. To prepare this
project I had referred the books on Jurisprudence available in the Library of the Chanakya
National Law University, and also used the web browsing for my research.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The objective of this research project is to critical appasied of the case of State of Karnataka v/s
Union of India and Article of 130 of the Constitution of India.

SCOPE AND LIMITATION

This Project is limited in its exhaustiveness due paucity of time and limited area
available in research.

TENTATIVE CHAPTERISATION
1. General law and principles involved

2. Name of the court, name of the judges and the parties to the case and Brief Facts

3. Issues Involved

4. Important Arguments

5. Judgement

6. Conclusion

3|P ag e