Article 4 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Article 4 of the Constitution of India is part of Part I, which deals with the Union and its Territory.
📜 Text of Article 4 – Laws made under Articles 2 and 3 to provide for the amendment of the First and the Fourth Schedule and supplemental, incidental and consequential matters
Article 4(1): Any law referred to in article 2 or article 3 shall contain such provisions for the amendment of the First Schedule and the Fourth Schedule as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of the law and may also contain such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions (including provisions as to representation in Parliament and in the Legislature or Legislatures of the State or States affected by such law) as Parliament may deem necessary.
Article 4(2): No such law as aforesaid shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368.
🔍 Explanation:
Article 4 is a procedural article.
It allows Parliament to make changes in the First Schedule (which lists the States and Union Territories) and Fourth Schedule (which deals with the allocation of seats in Rajya Sabha) when:
New States are formed
Areas of States are altered
States are renamed, etc.
✅ Importantly, such changes are not considered Constitutional Amendments under Article 368, and hence do not require a special majority.
🧑⚖️ Leading Case Law on Article 4:
1. Mangal Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1967 SC 944
Facts: Validity of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 was challenged.
Held:
The Court upheld the Act, stating that changes in the First Schedule and representation in Parliament (under Article 4) do not amount to a constitutional amendment under Article 368.
Parliament has the authority to enact laws for reorganization under Articles 2, 3, and 4.
2. Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay, AIR 1960 SC 51
Facts: Challenge to the State Reorganisation Act, 1956.
Held:
The power to reorganize states under Article 3, and the enabling provisions of Article 4, are legislative powers.
The reorganization of states does not violate the federal structure.
3. Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India, (2006) 7 SCC 1
Facts: Addressed issues around representation in Rajya Sabha and its link to state territory.
Held:
The Court upheld Parliament’s power to modify the Fourth Schedule in the context of reorganization or representation.
📌 Key Points:
| Feature | Article 4 |
|---|---|
| Deals with | Amendment to First and Fourth Schedules |
| Power given to | Parliament |
| Requires special majority? | ❌ No (Not under Article 368) |
| Type of law | Ordinary Law (not Constitutional Amendment) |
| Purpose | To operationalize Articles 2 and 3 |
RELATED Blog
0 comments