Swami Keshavnanda Bharti was the senior head of Edneer Mutt in Kerala, and Kerala Government attempted to control religiously owned property.
By two-state land reforms act, Kerala government wants the right to manage the religiously owned property.
And on the other hand, The Indian Constitution gives the authority to manage any religious property ( temple, mosque, mutt etc) to any trust, mentioned in article 26.
Now, what the Kerala Government did, It created restrictions in article 26 to gain the authority to manage religious property.
Advocate Nanabhoy Palkhiwala convinced Swami Keshavnanda Bharti to file a petition under Article 26.
After filing the petition, this case of the Kerala Government violating article 26, went to the Supreme Court after some hearings in The Kerala High Court.
In the Supreme Court, after 68 days of the hearing, The biggest bench was constituted in this case, a total of 13 judges.
In the final verdict, out of 13 judges, 7 judges which were the majority support Keshavnanda Bharti Petition by saying Parliament could amend any part of the constitution but the basic structure of the constitution can not be altered.
According to me Swami Keshavnanda Bharti Vs The Kerala Government case is a good example of justice.
By two-state land reforms act, Kerala government wants the right to manage the religiously owned property.
And on the other hand, The Indian Constitution gives the authority to manage any religious property ( temple, mosque, mutt etc) to any trust, mentioned in article 26.
Now, what the Kerala Government did, It created restrictions in article 26 to gain the authority to manage religious property.
Advocate Nanabhoy Palkhiwala convinced Swami Keshavnanda Bharti to file a petition under Article 26.
After filing the petition, this case of the Kerala Government violating article 26, went to the Supreme Court after some hearings in The Kerala High Court.
In the Supreme Court, after 68 days of the hearing, The biggest bench was constituted in this case, a total of 13 judges.
In the final verdict, out of 13 judges, 7 judges which were the majority support Keshavnanda Bharti Petition by saying Parliament could amend any part of the constitution but the basic structure of the constitution can not be altered.
According to me Swami Keshavnanda Bharti Vs The Kerala Government case is a good example of justice.
Comments
Post a Comment