The Role of 1Reasonable Restrictions* in the Indian Constitution Tirukkattupalli Kalyana Krishnamurthy Iyer June, 1974

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Role of 1Reasonable Restrictions* in the Indian Constitution Tirukkattupalli Kalyana Krishnamurthy Iyer June, 1974 THE ROLE OF 1 REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS* IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION TIRUKKATTUPALLI KALYANA KRISHNAMURTHY IYER JUNE, 1974 ProQuest Number: 11010392 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 11010392 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 x. CONTENTS Page No. Acknowledgements i. Preface ii. List of Abbreviations viii. INTRODUCTION: THE NATURE OF THE SUBJECT-MATTER GENERALLY 1. •Subjectivity* and •Objectivity* in Reas onableness 1 0 . An Introduction to Article 19 CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AND COMPARISONS Section Is The Indian Constituent Assembly and Limitation of Rights 17. Proceedings of the Advisory Committee 20. Assembly Proceedings - Stage 1 3 2 . Assembly Proceedings - Stage 2 39. Section 2 : »Due Process1 in American Law and •Reasonableness* in India 44. Indian Constituent Assembly and •Due Process* : In Outline 45. The *Ghost* of * Due Process* 49. Vagueness and Unreasonableness 68. Section 3 : The Role of Reasonableness in English Law 76. English Law on * Reasonableness* 83. Liversidge v# Anderson 87. Bye-laws and Indian Courts 1 0 2 . Section 4: The European Convention Introduction 106. •Margin of Appreciation* 109 Judicial Deference to legislative policies 113 CHAPTER 2 : NATURE AND SCOPE OP JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE REASONABLENESS OF RESTRICTIONS ON FUNDA­ MENTAL RIGHTS Section 1 (a): Scope of Review of Article 19 118 Reasonableness, Object of Legisla- tion and the Directive Principles of State Policy 139 Retrospectiveness and Reasonableness 154 (b): Burden of Proof under Article 19 158 Distinction between Articles 14 and 19 166 Section 2 (a): Reasonableness of Discriminatory Classification under Article 14 171 S.R. Das J. and Reasonable Classi­ fication 184 Discriminatory Procedures 188 Where Presumption of Constitution­ ality Neutralised 191 Criticisms of the ’Nexus’ Test 193 Reasonableness of ’Protective Dis­ crimination* and an Aspect of Welfare State in India 197 (b): The Relation of Article 14 to Article 19 207 Section 3 : Reasonable Restrictions on Inter-State Trade 211 CHAPTER 3: THE COURTS AND THE RESTRICTIONS - ILLUSTRATIONS Section 1 (a): Reasonableness of Restrictions on the Freedom of Speech and Expres­ sion - Article 19(1)(a) 217 xii. Page No. Preventive Detention, Article 19 and (in particular) Freedom of Speech 219. Reasonable Restrictions on the Press in India 246. Press and Economic and Industrial Regu- lat ions 257. •Decency and Morality’ 272. The Indian Supreme Court on Obscenity 276. Restrictions on Account of Contempt of Court 280. Sedit ion 292. Free Expression and Cinema Films 308. (b): Reasonable Restrictions on the Freedom of Assembly - Article 19(1)(b) 310. Rights of Government Servants to Demon­ strate 323. (c): Reasonable Restrictions on the Freedom of Association - Article 19(1)(c) and 19(4) 331. (d): Reasonable Restrictions on the Freedom of Movement - Article 19(l)(d) and 19(5) 346. Section 2 (a) Reasonable Restrictions on the Freedom of Free Pursuit of Trade, Business or Profession 357. Res extfa commercium in India 374. , Monopoly Rights 380. (b) Licensing Measures as Restrictions on the Right under Article 19(1)(g) 396. (c) Reasonable Restrictions on the Free­ dom to Acquire, Hold and Dispose of Property 401. xiii. Page No, CONCLUSION 432. APPENDIX I 447. APPENDIX II: PART III - FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS 449. Bibliography 460. Table of Cases 471. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is my pleasant duty to record my thanks to Professor J.D.M. Derrett, LL.D. (Lond.), D.C.L. (Oxon.) for the encouragement he has given me during the prepa­ ration of this thesis. His supervision has been extremely valuable to me and I am aware that this acknowledgement is far from adequate. I wish to thank my wife for assisting me in the preparation of the Table of Cases, the Bibliography, and in checking references. For the excellent typing done so quickly and cheerfully by Mrs. Baker, I thank her. The Library Staff at the School of Oriental and African Studies, particularly the two most concerned with Indian legal material, Miss Rosemary Stevens and Mr. Romesh Dogra, have been co-operative and friendly in meeting my many frequent requests. I should also like to thank the Library Staff at The Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Russell Square, for their able assistance. T.K.K. Iyer, LL.M. (Lond.), School of Oriental & African Studies London. PREFACE atoMiar e#judicial review of written constitu­ tions is seen by most modern researchers as a value-ridden, policy-making exercise. A rapid (I do not say superficial) analysis of the judicial process tenas to see it, in the end, m terms of judicial activism or restraint. In explanations of such ’activism* or ’restraint’ it is not uncommon to see references to factors personal to the judges such as their preferences on social and economic matters. Studies of the ’irrational factors’ in judicial policy-making, convincing as many of them are, could easily become exaggerated and tend to become one-sided. It is fair to ask that judges should be ’conscious’ of their pre­ ferences in whatever choices they make, but it may not be right to ask them to transcend themselves in a totally un­ realistic fashion. Admitting that judicial policy-making exists and that presuppositions pervade decisions interpreting a written Constitution, it still remains to be said that judges do, in the course of their work, try to express their concept of ’justice’ , albeit legal justice. Every general, unspecific expression in a written legislative document gives rise to judicial review and there constantly arise opportunities for the Judges to express their notion of ’justice' in the ciruumstances of the cases before them. Such a flexible expression as ’reasonable restrictions' (on Fundamental Rights) used in Article 19 of the Indian Constitution provides a good field in which to see how Judges develop the notion^of 'reasonableness' or 'fairness' which are inseparable from the very idea of judicial review. Among the many valuable and comprehen­ sive treatments of the constantly shifting subject of Indian constitutional law, there appears no treatise de­ voted to 'reasonableness' • It is not hard to see why (as will be explained below). One often hears that the notion of 9reasonableness' varies from case to case, from one set of circumstances to another. This platitude is true so far as it goes, but not being the product of detailed research into judicial attitudes, it has no secure foundation and thus cannot dispense with the need for an inquiry into the acute problem it poses with regard to judicial method. The notion of reasonable restrictions is a vital and growing area of the law relating to fundamental rights guaran­ teed by the Indian Constitution. The potentiality of this notion has already been realized in such areas as freedom of the press in India, freedom of assembly and freedom of associ­ ation. Further growth, we find, is possible in the area of free movement and free pursuit of profession. Needless to say there are considerable pressures in an underdeveloped country of India's complexity and size. A hypothetical judicial notion of reasonableness may be but one of hundreds of factors that constitute the basis of the Indian nation. The immediate impact of judicial attitudes expressed in decisions is felt by the administration and the State. Only indirectly does the citizen perceive the effects. Nevertheless, a link must exist between the judicial view of 'reasonable restrictions* on the basic freedoms ana the evolving notions of society ana government in India. It would take more than a thesis to explore such a coup lex subject. As long as Courts are taken seriously in India, in the sense in which they have been since 1772, the constitu­ tional requirement of reasonableness esqpressly referred to in Article 19 will play a vital role. It is not too much to speculate that in the long run the Courts could by being sensitive to the problems faced both by the public and the executive when the latter seeks to curtail the established rights of the former (the'litigation situation'), repel the charge presently levelled against them that they represent, as in other underdeveloped countries, the values of an elite. India's judiciary undoubtedly works a Constitution that has borrowed ideas from the West. But the 'liberal' democratic view of fundamental rights and permissible limitations on themj may not be incompatible with perfecting the admini­ stration and erecting new institutions to help raise the standard of living. Already the impact of Article 19 on the administration cam be seen. The result has amounted to a pruning of statutory rules and administrative regula­ tions. No unwieldy or casually-framed rule could survive on the touchstone of procedural or substantive reasonableness. Further Indian Courts have insisted on subordinate legisla­ tion keeping strictly to the purpose of the statute under which they were framed. Judicial attempts to e2q>and their jurisdiction under Article 19 to other areas of the fundamental rights part have not been successful so far. The Supreme Court's claiip,for example, to review the reasonableness of expropriatory legis­ lation has been consistently thwarted by Constitutional Amend­ ments • Thus, the accident of one party domination in Parlia­ ment and its command of the required majority to pass the amendments to the Constitution have stultified a natural growth of the Courts' jurisdiction.
Recommended publications
  • In Late Colonial India: 1942-1944
    Rohit De ([email protected]) LEGS Seminar, March 2009 Draft. Please do not cite, quote, or circulate without permission. EMASCULATING THE EXECUTIVE: THE FEDERAL COURT AND CIVIL LIBERTIES IN LATE COLONIAL INDIA: 1942-1944 Rohit De1 On the 7th of September, 1944 the Chief Secretary of Bengal wrote an agitated letter to Leo Amery, the Secretary of State for India, complaining that recent decisions of the Federal Court were bringing the governance of the province to a standstill. “In war condition, such emasculation of the executive is intolerable”, he thundered2. It is the nature and the reasons for this “emasculation” that the paper hopes to uncover. This paper focuses on a series of confrontations between the colonial state and the colonial judiciary during the years 1942 to 1944 when the newly established Federal Court struck down a number of emergency wartime legislations. The courts decisions were unexpected and took both the colonial officials and the Indian public by surprise, particularly because the courts in Britain had upheld the legality of identical legislation during the same period. I hope use this episode to revisit the discussion on the rule of law in colonial India as well as literature on judicial behavior. Despite the prominence of this confrontation in the public consciousness of the 1940’s, its role has been downplayed in both historical and legal accounts. As I hope to show this is a result of a disciplinary divide in the historical engagement with law and legal institutions. Legal scholarship has defined the field of legal history as largely an account of constitutional and administrative developments paralleling political developments3.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 3 Issue Iv || May 2021 ||
    PIF – A++ ISSN 2581-6349 VOLUME 3 ISSUE IV || MAY 2021 || Email: [email protected] Website: www.jurisperitus.co.in 1 PIF – A++ ISSN 2581-6349 DISCLAIMER No part of this publication may be reproduced or copied in any form by any means without prior written permission of Editor-in-chief of Jurisperitus – The Law Journal. The Editorial Team of Jurisperitus holds the copyright to all articles contributed to this publication. The views expressed in this publication are purely personal opinions of the authors and do not reflect the views of the Editorial Team of Jurisperitus or Legal Education Awareness Foundation. Though all efforts are made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, Jurisperitus shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to oversight or otherwise. 2 PIF – A++ ISSN 2581-6349 EDITORIAL TEAM Editor-in-Chief ADV. SIDDHARTH DHAWAN Core-Team Member || Legal Education Awareness Foundation Phone Number + 91 9013078358 Email ID – [email protected] Additional Editor -in-Chief ADV. SOORAJ DEWAN Founder || Legal Education Awareness Foundation Phone Number + 91 9868629764 Email ID – [email protected] Editor MR. RAM AVTAR Senior General Manager || NEGD Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology Phone Number +91 9968285623 Email ID: [email protected] SMT. BHARTHI KUKKAL Principal || Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, New Delhi Ministry of Human Resource and Development Phone Number + 91 9990822920 Email ID: [email protected] MS. NIKHITA Assistant Manager || Deloitte India Phone Number +91 9654440728 Email ID: [email protected] MR. TAPAS BHARDWAJ Member || Raindrops Foundation Phone + 91 9958313047 Email ID: [email protected] 3 PIF – A++ ISSN 2581-6349 ABOUT US Jurisperitus: The Law Journal is a non-annual journal incepted with an aim to provide a platform to the masses of our country and re-iterate the importance and multi-disciplinary approach of law.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiram E. Chodosh ______HIRAM E
    Hiram E. Chodosh ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ HIRAM E. CHODOSH PRESIDENT AND PROFESSOR OF THE COLLEGE CLAREMONT McKENNA COLLEGE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Claremont McKenna College, Claremont, California President and Professor of the College (from July 2013) Chair, Council of Presidents, The Claremont Colleges (2016-2017) University of Utah, S.J. Quinney College of Law, Salt Lake City, Utah (2006-2013) Dean and Hugh B. Brown Presidential Professor of Law Senior Presidential Adviser on Global Strategy Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Cleveland, Ohio (1993-2006) Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Joseph C. Hostetler–Baker & Hostetler Professor of Law Director, Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, India, (2003) Fulbright Senior Scholar Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton, New York City (1990-1993) Associate Orion Consultants, Inc., New York City (1985-1987) Management Consultant GLOBAL JUSTICE ADVISORY EXPERIENCE Government of Iraq, Director, Global Justice Project: Iraq (2008-2010) United Nations Development Program (Asia), Adviser (2006-2007) World Bank Group, Adviser (2005-2006) International Monetary Fund, Adviser (1999-2004) U.S. State Department, Rapporteur (1993-2003) Page 1 of 25 Hiram E. Chodosh ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of India
    Supreme Court of India drishtiias.com/printpdf/supreme-court-of-india The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial court and the final court of appeal under the Constitution of India, the highest constitutional court, with the power of judicial review. India is a federal State and has a single and unified judicial system with three tier structure, i.e. Supreme Court, High Courts and Subordinate Courts. Brief History of the Supreme Court of India The promulgation of Regulating Act of 1773 established the Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta as a Court of Record, with full power & authority. It was established to hear and determine all complaints for any crimes and also to entertain, hear and determine any suits or actions in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The Supreme Courts at Madras and Bombay were established by King George – III in 1800 and 1823 respectively. The India High Courts Act 1861 created High Courts for various provinces and abolished Supreme Courts at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay and also the Sadar Adalats in Presidency towns. These High Courts had the distinction of being the highest Courts for all cases till the creation of Federal Court of India under the Government of India Act 1935. The Federal Court had jurisdiction to solve disputes between provinces and federal states and hear appeal against Judgements from High Courts. After India attained independence in 1947, the Constitution of India came into being on 26 January 1950. The Supreme Court of India also came into existence and its first sitting was held on 28 January 1950.
    [Show full text]
  • LOK SABHA DEBATES (English Version)
    Ninth Series, Vol. X No, 23 Thursday, Oct,4,1990 Asvina12, 1990/1912(Saka) LOK SABHA DEBATES (English Version) Third Session (Ninth Lok Sabha) LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT NEW DELHI Price: Rs., 50,00 C ONTENTS [Ninth Series, Vol. X, Third Session -Second Part, 199011912 iSaka)] No. 23, Thursday, October 4 ,1990/Asvina 12,1912 (Saka) Co l u mn s Re. Adjournment Motion 3—7 Police atrocities in dealing with students’ agitation against Government’s decision on Mandal Commission Report and resort to self-immolation by students against the decision Papers Laid on the Table 8—9 Motion Under Rule 388— Adopted 10 Suspension of Rule 338 Shri Mufti Mohammad Sayeed 10 Constitution (Seventy-sixth Amendment) Bill (Amendment of Article 356) -Introduced 10—11 Shri Mufti Mohammad Sayeed 10-11 Motion to consider 11-23 Shri Mufti Mohammad Sayeed 11 Clauses 2 and 1 23—39 Motion to Pass 39-59 Shri Mufti Mohammad Sayeed 39, 4 5 -4 6 Shri A. K. Roy 39—40 Dr. Thambi Durai 40—42 Shrimati Bimal Kaur Khalsa 42—44 Shri Inder Jit 4 4 -4 5 Re. Killing of innocent persons and burning of houses at Handwara in Jammu & Kashmir on 1st October, 1990 61—65 Re. Attention and care given by the Indian High Commission in London to Late Cuef Justice of India Shri Sabyasachi Mukherjee during his iltaess 65—111 Re. Setting up of Development Boards for Vidarbha, Marath- wada and other regions in Maharashtra. H I—116 (0 1 ^ 1 18S/N1>/91 (ii) Co l u m n s Adjournment Motion 117—206 Police atrocities in dealing with students’ dotation against Government’s decision on Mandal Commission Report and resort to self-immolation by students against the decision Shri B.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Reviewers
    INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE LAW REVIEW LIST OF REVIEWERS ILI Law Review follows a rigorous blind-peer review of all the articles/case comments/bill comments/book reviews etc. submitted for publications. If you wish to be a reviewer for the upcoming issue of ILI Law Review please convey your details along with areas of interest on which you wish to review articles. Please note that ILI expects a detailed review of the articles in track change mode. We also provide a proforma to the reviewer where specific comments are required to be made regarding the suitability of the article. If any reviewer does not find his/her name or wants a change in the detail mentioned in the list, s/he is also requested to convey on the following email address – [email protected] S.No. Name Designation 1. Aakriti Mathur Advocate, Delhi High Court Research Scholar, IIP, Tokyo 2. Abhinav Kumar Mishra Associate Partner (IP Law), Legal Crescent LLP PhD Scholar, Faculty of Law, Jamia MiliaIslamia, 3. Abhishek Gupta New Delhi 4. Abhilasha Singh LLM, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi Assistant Professor, School of Law, Christ University, 5. Aditi Nidhi Bangalore and Research Scholar, GNLU, Gujarat 6. Aditi Singh Research Scholar, USLLS, GGSIPU, New Delhi 7. Aditya Ranjan PhD Scholar, Faculty of Law, Delhi University Associate Professor, School of Law, Galgotia 8. Ajit Kaushal (Dr.) University, Greater Noida 9. Aman Deep Singh (Dr.) Assistant Professor, RMLNLU, Lucknow Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Manav Rachna 10. Amit Kumar University, Faridabad 11. Amit Raj Agarwal Legal Advisor, Forum for Democracy and Academician Regional PF Commissioner and Head of legal division, 12.
    [Show full text]
  • ALAGAPPA UNIVERSITY 32141-Contemporary India Since
    ALAGAPPA UNIVERSITY [ACCREDITED WITH ‘A+’ Grade by NAAC (CGPA:3.64) in the Third Cycle and Graded as Catego-rIy University by MHRD-UGC] (A State University Established by the Government of Tamiln adu) KARAIKUDI – 630 003 DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION M.A HISTORY IV SEMESTER 32141-Contemporary India Since 1947 A.D Copy Right Reserved For Private use only INTRODUCTION India‘s independence represented for its people the start of an epoch that was imbued with a new vision. In 1947, the country commenced its long march to overcome the colonial legacy of economic underdevelopment, gross poverty, near-total illiteracy, wide prevalence of diseases, and stark social inequality and injustice. Achieving independence was only the first stop, the first break—the end of colonial political control: centuries of backwardness was now to be overcome, the promises of the freedom struggle to be fulfilled, and people‘s hopes to be met. The task of nation-building was taken up by the people and leaders with a certain elan and determination and with confidence in their capacity to succeed. When Nehru assumed office as the first Prime Minister of India, there were a myriad of issues lying in front of him, vying for his attention. Nehru knew that it was highly important that he prioritized things. For him, ―First things must come first and the first thing is the security and stability of India.‖ In the words of eminent political scientist W.H Morris- Jones, the imminent task was to ―hold things together, to ensure survival, to get accustomed to the feel of being in the water, to see to it that the vessels keep afloat‖.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Ranking 2021
    EDUCATION POST | December 2020 | 39 IIRF-2021 | BEST LAW COLLEGES (GOVT.) LAW COLLEGES (GOVERNMENT) TOP 30 RANK* NAME OF LAW COLLEGE CITY STATE 1 National Law School of India University Bengaluru Karnataka 2 National Law University New Delhi Delhi 3 NALSAR University of Law Hyderabad Telangana 4 The WB National University of Juridical Sciences Kolkata West Bengal 5 Dr. Ambedkar Govt. Law College Chennai Tamil Nadu 6 Faculty of Law University of Delhi Delhi Delhi 7 ILS Law College Pune Maharashtra Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law, Kharagpur West Bengal 8 IIT Kharagpur 9 Faculty of Law, Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh Uttar Pradesh 10 Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College of Law Bengaluru Karnataka 11 Maharashtra National Law University Mumbai Maharashtra 12 Gujarat National Law University Gandhinagar Gujarat * Page 6 EDUCATION POST | December 2020 | 40 IIRF-2021 | BEST LAW COLLEGES (GOVT.) RANK* NAME OF LAW COLLEGE CITY STATE 13 Dr. B R Ambedkar National Law University Sonipat Haryana 14 University School of law and Legal Studies New Delhi Delhi 15 National Law University and Judicial Academy Guwahati Assam 16 National Law University Cuttack Odisha 17 Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University Varanasai Uttar Pradesh 18 National Law University Jodhpur Rajasthan 19 Faculty Of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia New Delhi Delhi 20 Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law Patiala Punjab 21 National University of Advanced Legal Studies Kochi Kerala 22 The Tamilnadu Dr Ambedkar Law University Chennai Tamilnadu 23 Government Law College Mumbai Maharashtra 24 University College of Law, Osmania University Hyderabad Telangana 25 karnataka State Law University Hubli Karnataka 26 University of Mumbai Law Academy Mumbai Maharashtra New Campus University of Lucknow, Lucknow Uttar Pradesh 27 Faculty of Law 28 National Law Institute University Bhopal Madhya Pradesh 29 Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Political Science Dissertations Department of Political Science 5-9-2016 Extraterritorial Courts and States: Learning from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Harold Young Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/political_science_diss Recommended Citation Young, Harold, "Extraterritorial Courts and States: Learning from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2016. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/political_science_diss/40 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Political Science at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXTRATERRITORIAL COURTS AND STATES: LEARNING FROM THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL by HAROLD AVNON YOUNG Under the Direction of Amy Steigerwalt, PhD ABSTRACT In 2015, South Africa withdrew from the International Criminal Court asserting United Nation’s Security Council bias in referring only African cases (Strydom October 15, 2015; Duggard 2013) and the United Kingdom reiterated a pledge to withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights, asserting that the court impinges on British sovereignty (Watt 2015). Both are examples of extraterritorial courts which are an important part of regional and global jurisprudence. To contribute to our understanding of the relationship between states and extraterritorial courts, I examine arguably the first and best example of an extraterritorial court, namely the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC). Drawing on 50 British Commonwealth states, this dissertation explores the factors influencing the decision to accede to an extraterritorial court and why some states subsequently opt to sever ties.
    [Show full text]
  • SUBSTR DESCR International Schools ICELAND 001041 Haskoli
    SUBSTR DESCR International Schools ICELAND 001041 Haskoli Islands 046908 Icelandic Col Social Pedagogy 001042 Kennarahaskoli Islands 002521 Taekniskoli Islands 002521 Technical College Iceland 001042 Univ Col Education Iceland 001041 Univ Iceland INDIA 000702 A Loyola Col 000678 Abhyuday Skt Col 000705 Ac Col 000705 Ac Col Commerce 000705 Ac Training Col 000629 Academy Of Architecture 000651 Acharatlal Girdharlal Teachers 000705 Acharya Brajendra Nath Seal Co 000701 Acharya Thulasi Na Col Commerc 000715 Adarsh Degree Col 000707 Adarsh Hindi Col 000715 Adarsh Vidya Mandir Shikshak 000710 Adarsha Col Ed 000698 Adarsha Ed Societys Arts Sci C 000710 Adhyapak Col 000701 Adichunchanagiri Col Ed 000701 Adichunchanagiri Inst Tech 000678 Adinath Madhusudan Parashamani 000651 Adivasi Arts Commerce Col Bhil 000651 Adivasi Arts Commerce Col Sant 000732 Adoni Arts Sci Col 000710 Ae Societys Col Ed 000715 Agarwal Col 000715 Agarwal Evening Col 000603 Agra University 000647 Agrasen Balika Col 000647 Agrasen Mahila Col 000734 Agri Col Research Inst Coimbat 000734 Agri Col Research Inst Killiku 000734 Agri Col Research Inst Madurai 000710 Agro Industries Foundation 000651 Ahmedabad Arts Commerce Col 000651 Ahmedabad Sci Col 000651 Ahmedabad Textile Industries R 000710 Ahmednagar Col 000706 Aizwal Col 000726 Aja Col 000698 Ajantha Ed Societys Arts Comme 000726 Ajra Col 000724 Ak Doshi Mahila Arts Commerce 000712 Akal Degree Col International Schools 000712 Akal Degree Col Women 000678 Akhil Bhartiya Hindi Skt Vidya 000611 Alagappa College Tech, Guindy 002385
    [Show full text]
  • INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE Bhagwandas Road, New Delhi-110 001 Tel
    INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE Bhagwandas Road, New Delhi-110 001 Tel. : 011-23386321, 011-23382190 Fax: 011-23386321 Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Director : Prof. (Dr.) Manoj Kumar Sinha Registrar : Sh. Shreenibas Chandra Prusty Indian Law Institute (ILI) was founded in 1956 primarily with the objective of promoting and conducting legal research. The objectives of the Institute as laid down in its Memorandum of Association are to cultivate the science of law, to promote advanced studies and research in law so as to meet the social, economic and other needs of the Indian people, to promote systematization of law, to encourage and conduct investigations in legal and allied fields, to improve legal education, to impart instructions in law, and to publish studies, books, periodicals, etc. The Institute is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The Indian Law Institute has the requisite independence and academic freedom to carry out its objectives. The membership of the Institute is now nearly three thousand representing the persons interested in the study and advancement of law. Hon’ble Chief Justice of India is the ex-officio President of the Institute. The Law Minister of Government of India & the Attorney-General for India are its ex-officio Vice Presidents. Third Vice-President is elected by the members of the Governing Council, from among themselves. Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and High Courts, prominent lawyers, Government officials and Professors of Law are represented in the Governing Council of the Institute. The Institute's Library is one of the best libraries in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Universities University 1 Indian Institute of Technology Bombay 2 Indian Institute of Technology Madras 3 India
    List of universities University 1 Indian Institute of Technology Bombay 2 Indian Institute of Technology Madras 3 Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur 4 University of Delhi 5 Indian Institute of Technology Delhi 6 Anna University 7 Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur 8 Manipal University 9 Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee 10 National Institute of Technology, Rourkela 11 Indian Institute of Science 12 National Institute of Technology Calicut 13 National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli 14 Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati 15 National Institute of Technology Karnataka 16 Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar 17 National Institute of Technology, Warangal 18 Delhi Technological University 19 Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur 20 Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology 21 National Institute of Technology, Silchar 22 Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad 23 Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat 24 Indian School of Mines 25 Jadavpur University 26 National Institute of Technology, Durgapur 27 VIT University 28 Indian Institute of Technology Indore 29 Panjab University 30 Bengal Engineering and Science University 31 Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology 32 University of Pune 33 Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology 34 Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar 35 PDPM Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design & Manufacturing 36 Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering and Technology 37 Delhi Technological University 38 SRM University 39 Jawaharlal Nehru
    [Show full text]