Assignment

Of

Interpretation of Statutes

Submitted To; Submitted By;

Divyansha Dwivedi Yash Kedia
Assistant Professor Student ID – 18FLICDDN02179
ICFAI Law School BA-LLB (H.) III Year,
The ICFAI University, Dehradun Section- “C”
Question - 2: -

To remove the disability imposed by custom or usage on certain classes of Hindus

against entry into a Hindu public temple, State X enacts a law under article 25(2)(b)
of the constitution and throws open the entry to any such temple to all sections of
Hindus. The trustees of denominational Hindu temple resists the application of such
law on the ground that their temple had been built for the benefit of a particular Hindu
sect. They contend that under article 26 (b) of the constitution that, they have a right
to manage their affairs in the matters of religion which includes right of entry also.
Discuss the rule of interpretation that you will apply to resolve the above dispute.

Answer: -

The rule of interpretation that will be applied to resolve this dispute is the rule of
Harmonious Construction which is well settled and says that, when there are in an
enactment two provisions which cannot be reconciled with each other, they should be
so interpreted that, if possible, effect could be given to both. This rule is expounded
by CJ Gwyer in reference to central provisions bearer act 1938 and has been
followed by the courts since then.

The above dispute is related to the Article 25(2)(b) and Article 26(b) of the
constitution of India which talks about the Practise of Religion and Managing the
Religious affairs respectively. In the above given question the dispute is that, the
State X to remove the disability imposed by custom or usage on certain classes of
Hindus against entry into a Hindu public temple, has enacted a law under article
25(2)(b) and throws open the entry to any such temple to all sections of Hindus.
Which was being challenged by the trustees of denominational Hindu temple on the
ground that their temple had been built for the benefit of a particular Hindu sect. By
contending that under article 26(b) of the constitution, they have a right to manage
their affairs in the matters of religion which includes right of entry also.

The same dispute as given above was discussed in the case of, Sri Venkataramana
Devaru V State of Mysore, AIR 1958 SC 255,
in which the trustees of Hindu temple (Sri Venkataramana temple) filed a suit against
a law enacted by the Government of Madras named as Madras Temple Entry
Authorisation Act 1947, hereinafter referred to as “the Act”, and asked for the
declaration that the Sri Venkataramana temple at Moolky was not a temple as defined
in Section 2(2) of the Act. It was alleged in the plaint that the temple was founded for
the benefit of the Gowda Saraswath Brahmins in Moolky Petah, that it had been at all
times under their management, that they were the followers of the Kashi Mutt, and
that it was the head of the Mutt that performed various religious ceremonies in the
temple, and that the other communities had no rights to worship therein.

Later, in 1950, when the Constitution of India came into force, the plaintiffs again
raised the further contention by way of amendment of the plaint that, in any event, as
the temple was a denominational one, they were entitled to the protection of Article
26, that it was a matter of religion as to who were entitled to take part in worship in a
temple, and that Section 3 of the Act, insofar as it provided for the institution being
thrown open to communities other than Gowda Saraswath Brahmins, was repugnant
to Article 26(b) of the Constitution and was, in consequence, void.

it was observed that,

 Article 25(2)(b) & Article 26 (b) are two provisions of equal authority, neither of
them being subject to the other. Now the question is that, how the apparent
conflict between them is to be resolved.

 So in this regard, the rule of Construction is well settled and says that, where
there are in an enactment two provisions which cannot be reconciled with each
other, they should be so interpreted that, if possible, effect could be given to both.

 Applying this rule, if the contention of the appellants is to be accepted, then

Article 25(2)(b) will become wholly nugatory in its application to denominational
temples, though, as stated above, the language of that Article includes them. On
the other hand, if the contention of the respondents is accepted, then full effect
can be given to Article 26(b) in all matters of religion, subject only to this that as
 regards one aspect of them, entry into a temple for worship, the rights declared
under Article 25(2)(b) will prevail.

 While, in the former case, Article 25(2)(b) will be put wholly out of operation,
and, in the latter, effect can be given to both that provision and Article 26(b). We
must accordingly hold that Article 26(b) must be read subject to Article 25(2)(b).

Contention: -

Later it was contended by the Government side (respondent) that, the right to enter
into a temple which is protected by Article 25(2)(b) is a right to enter into it for
purposes of worship, that that right should be liberally construed, and that any
modifications in it constitute a serious invasion of that right, and should be set aside
as unconstitutional.

Decision: -

Justice T. L. VENKATARAMA AIYAR held that,

The right protected by Article 25(2)(b) is a right to enter into a temple for purposes of
worship, and that further it should be construed liberally in favour of the public. But it
does not follow from this that that right is absolute and unlimited in character. No
member of the Hindu public could, for example, claim as part of the rights protected
by Article 25(2)(b) that a temple must be kept open for worship at all hours of the day
and night, or that he should personally perform those services, which the Archakas
alone could perform. It is again a well-known practice of religious institutions of all
denominations to limit some of its services to persons who have been specially
initiated, though at other times, the public in general are free to participate in the
worship. Thus, the right recognised by Article 25(2)(b) must necessarily be subject to
some limitations or regulations, and one such limitation or regulation must arise in the
process of harmonising the right conferred by Article 25(2)(b) with that protected by
Article 26(b).
Question - 3: -

For interpreting the words vegetable and green vegetable in clauses providing for
exemption from tax liability under various sales tax legislations, the Indian courts
including the supreme court of India were having various choices in interpreting these
terms ranging from botanical dictionary and ordinary meaning of the said words.
Clearly bring out the rule of interpretation adopted by the Supreme Court while
interpreting these words, meaning given to them and the rationale behind such
interpretation.

Answer: -

For interpreting the words vegetable and green vegetable for exemption from tax
liability from various tax the supreme court uses the popular sense or common
parlance meaning. The word used in the Act must be interpreted in the light of their
popular meaning and common parlance meaning as understood by the common man
and the person dealing with such things or article in the day to day life.

Cases: -

1. Ramavatar Budhaiprasad V. Asst. Sales Tax Officer (1961),

Issue: -

The question before the court was whether betel leaf was subject to sales tax. The
appellant contended that no such tax could be levied as betel leave is vegetable on the
scale of which no tax could be imposed. the Opulent relied on the dictionary meaning
of vegetables which says that vegetable is that it which is pertaining to, comprised or
consisted of, or derived, or obtained from plants or their parts.

Decision: -

The court held that betel leaves couldn't be given dictionary, technical or botanical
meaning when the ordinary and natural meaning is clear and unambiguous. Being a
word of everyday use it must be understood in its popular sense by which people are
conversant with. the meaning of the word will be chosen which will be best attributed
to the statute and its purpose and therefore beetle leaf is liable to sales tax.
2. Motipur Zamindary Co. Ltd. V. State of Bihar (AIR 1962 SC 660)

Issue: -

Whether sugarcane falls within the term “Green Vegetable” and is therefore exempted
from the sale sales tax.

Observation: -

The Court observed that in Webster’s dictionary, sugarcane has been defined as “a
grass extensively grown in tropical and warm regions for its sugar” and in oxford
dictionary as “a tall perennial grass cultivated in tropical and sub - tropical countries
and forming the chief source of unmanufactured sugar”.

Decision: -

It was therefore held by the High Court that, Sugarcane was not included and does not
fall within the definition of the term “green vegetables” as understood by common
mam and then dismissed the appeal from the appellant.

3. State of West Bengal v. Washi Ahmad, 1977

Issue: -

Whether Green Ginger falls within the category of goods described as “vegetables,
green or dried, commonly known as ‘sabji, tarkari or sag’ “ in Item (6) of Schedule I
to the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941

Decision: -

The Court held that,

That Green Ginger is included within the meaning of the words “vegetables” -
commonly known as ‘sabji, tarkari or sag’ “ in Item (6) of Schedule I and its sales
must be held to be exempt from tax under Section 6 of the Act.
Question - 4: - Write short notes on;

1. Preamble as a source of Interpretation;

2. Statutes must be read as a whole

Answer: -

1. Preamble as a source of Interpretation: -

 Meaning of Preamble: -

Preamble means a preliminary or introductory statement, especially attached to a

statute or constitution setting forth its purpose. Preamble is introductory part of the
constitution. The constitution of India opens with Preamble. The Preamble to a
constitution is expected to embody the fundamental value and the philosophy on
which the constitution is based and the aims and objectives which the founding
fathers enjoined the polity to strive to achieve. Therefore, it is also regarded as the key
to open the mind of the makers of the constitution which may show the general
purposes for which they made several provisions in the constitution.

 Interpretational value of Preamble: -

The Constitution of India starts with a preamble which contains the spirit of the
constitution and every Legislation framed is in conformity with the spirit of the
preamble and thus the constitutionality and objects of the statues are tested. The
preamble to the constitution of India begins with” we the people of India”, thus
conferring that the authority of the constitution lies in the people of India, who have
themselves led to the enactment of constitution for their own governance.

Preamble of Indian Constitution reflects the basic structure and the spirit of the
constitution. It is regarded as the preamble serves as a channelizing tool for the
interpretation of the constitution as a whole. It acts as the preface of the Indian
constitution and lays down the philosophical ideas. It represents the entire constitution
in its written words. It contains the basic structure of the constitution and is thus
considered to be a vital part. The preamble also bears the aims and objectives that the
people of India seek to establish with the establishment of the Indian Constitution, any
legislation made is made with the purpose and in accordance with the objectivity of
the preamble itself. So, ‘Preamble is the legislation in a nutshell’. It contains the
recitals showing the reason for enactment of any legislation and prevents the
legislation to fall in the arms of ambiguity. The preamble is significant because it
highlights the type of society and government it wishes to establish.

2. Statutes must be read as a whole: -

The statute as a whole, the previous state of the law, other statute in pari materia. The
general scope of the statute, and the mischief it is to remedy, is the basic context of
any statute. The elementary rule states that the intention of the Legislature must be
found by reading the statute as a whole. Every clause needs to be construed with
reference to the context and other clauses of the Act, to make a consistent enactment
of the whole statute or series of statutes relating to the subject matter. It is the most
natural and genuine exposition of a statue. It is important to read the statute as whole
because the language is plain or ambiguous can only be truly arrives by studying the
statute as a whole. How far and to what extent each component influences the
meaning of the other, would be different in each given case. Each section must be
construed as a whole, whether or not one of the parts is a saving clause or proviso.
They may be interdependent; each portion throwing light, if need be on the rest.