These two SC Judg. can be a trendsetter in State Functioning...................................

[Sundeep Jalan]

Friends,

Importance of irrigation to agri-culture and to the Paramount and Profound development of a Nation cannot be over emphasised or overstated and that to a Nation which needs to feed its billion population twice daily and which has not been done so far,a Nation where people and children dying of hunger is rampant, a Nation where the sector is instrumental in reducing poverty and giving livelihood to a massive 60% of the work force.

Just as Easement{Right to passage} is imperative for the beneficial enjoyment of an Immovable property, Irrigation is an inalienable component of Agri-Culture. 

 

The Writer is founding his arguements on  Constitutional Provisions and its Philosophy, Viz: Article 19(1)(g) which Guarantees all Citizen to have right to Practice any Profession or to carry on any Trade or Occupation And other Constitutional provisions.

 

Irrigation  is  a  State  subject; In Our Country if any Person intends to  purchase  Agricultural  Land  ,  She/He  must  be  a  FARMER. It  follows  the  Govt.  has  itself  recognised  farming  as  an  Occupation. 

 

Besides, having regard to the Fundamental rights of a Citizen Of India as stated hereinbefore, it becomes Imperative on the State to ensure adequate Irrigational Infrastructure & water to all Farmers
and  they  cannot  be allowed to   plead  inadequacy  of  Funds  as a  defence  for  not  ensuring the same.

The "Reasons" -
1) The  State  has  Power  to  impose  Taxes  for  generating  revenue.
2) The  State  has  unfettered  powers  in  framing  its Economic and Fiscal  policies, allocations and  Programmes  without  even  subject  to  Judicial  review.

 

The Writer is not even talking about rampant corruption exist in the State  machinary.
 
Power Comes with Responsibilities.

 

A BROADER VIEW On FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS:

 

Taking a cue from the ruling established in the Keshavananda Bharati case in which the Hon. SC recognized that, among others, Fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution is the basic features of the Constituion which is beyond the plenary amending powers of the parliament, it is submitted that-
"It is not suffice that no legislation can be made which abridge the fundamental rights but at the same time these fundamental rights must be ensured.

In the present state of affairs, though the State is restrained from making any law which dilutes or abridge any fundamental right, State has rather grossly failed to ensure even the most bare necessities of Life to the masses, forget the full set of Fundamental rights.
  
What we really mean by Basic Structure Doctrine,"You cannot dilute Fundamental rights" is that You must ensure these Fundamental rights.

States' inability to ensure the same on the pretext of paucity of funds cannot be accepted on the ground that thy have, among others, powers to impose taxes for generating revenues and has complete freedom in framing their economic and fiscal policies even without subject to judicial scrutiny.

 

Any and every violation of fundamental right inevitably 'damage', 'emasculate', 'destroy', 'abrogate', 'change' or 'alter' the 'basic structure' or framework of the constitution.

 

To quote Dr.M S Swaminathan, the Father of Green Revolution in our Country,
"if the Agri sector cannot go right, nothing else has a chance to go right in the country."

 

Questions to be Answered:

 

1) Is it lawful for the State to plead paucity of funds as a defence for its inability to ensure basic fundamental rights ?

 

Ans: The landmark judgment given by Hon.SC in Municipality of Ratlam V Vardichand(1980).

 

The Hon. Court, thru Justice Krishna Iyer, Categorically rejected the contentions of Municipality,the plea of Paucity of funds as defence,for its failure in the due discharge of public duties.

 

The Court Said,
"The Criminal Prcocedure Code(as in the instant case) operates against Statutory bodies and Others regardless of the Cash in their coffers even as human rights under part Three of the Constitution have to be respected by the State regardless of Budgetary provisions. Likewise, Sec 133 of the said Act has no saving clause when the Municipal council is penniless.
Otherwise a profligate Statutory body or pachydermic Govt.Agency may legally defy duties under the Law by urging in self defence a self created bankrupcy or perverted expenditure budget.That cannot be."

Sandeep Bharat.
Mumbai-57.