Page:29357 2016 1 1501 44512 Judgement 11-May-2023.pdf/84

PART L "'IN this part. unless the context otherwise requires the expression 'State' means a State specified in Part A or Part B of the I Schedule'."

This definition, thus, made it clear that the word "State" in Part XIV was not to include part C States. Union Territories are the successors of the Part C '''States. It follows, therefore, that they are also''' expressly excluded from the definition of "State" in Part XIV. There is nothing particular in the context of Article 313 which would require the word "State" therein to include a Union Territory.

…

Article 367(1) of the Constitution applies to the interpretation of the Constitution the provision of the General Clauses Act as adapted under Article 372(2) '''of the Constitution. In view of Article 372(2)(a) such an''' adaptation had to be made within three years from the '''commencement of the Constitution. The definition of''' a "State" in section 3(58) of the General Clauses Act as adapted by the Adaptation of laws Order, 1950 issued under Article 372(2) of the Constitution [...]”

(emphasis supplied)

130. In appeal, this Court set aside the judgment of the High Court of Delhi. Firstly, this Court held that in view of the amended definition of the expression “State” under Section 3(58) of the General Clauses Act, as adapted by the Adaptation of Laws Order 1956, there was nothing repugnant to the subject or context to make that definition inapplicable to Part XIV of the Constitution. This Court reasoned that Article 372A was incorporated in the Constitution since Parliament felt the necessity of giving a power akin to Article 372 to the President for the purpose of bringing the provisions of any law in force immediately before the commencement of the 1956 Constitution Amendment in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, as amended by the 1956 Constitution Amendment. This Court relied on Advance Insurance (supra) to hold that Article 372-A gave a