A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking a declaration that the procedure of including the words Socialist, Secular and Integrity in the Preamble through the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution in 1976 is manifestly arbitrary and against the due process of law.
The plea lodged through Advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey stated that the 42nd Amendment of the Preamble violates Article 14 of the Constitution and hence is unconstitutional and void. The petitioner contended that the Preamble is a statement of adoption of the Constitution by the Constituent Assembly and therefore cannot be changed in the original adoption statement, as it is an unalterable fact.
Through the PIL, petitioner, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, sought directions to declare that the procedure of inserting the words Socialist, Secular and Integrity in the Preamble of the Constitution, is manifestly arbitrary, against the due process of law and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. Furthermore, it also urged the top court to direct and declare that Preamble has been adopted by the Constituent Assembly on November 26, 1949, therefore, any alteration in the adoption statement in 1976 without changing the date and that on behalf of the Constituent Assembly, which did not exist in 1976, is manifestly arbitrary and offends Article 14.
The plea also sought declaration that the normal tenure of the Lok Sabha expired on March 18, 1976 and the words Socialist and Secular were inserted in the Preamble on November 2, 1976 and hence the mandate of the people of India came to an end and there was no Will of the People.
The petitioner in his plea submitted that during the black days of the emergency, the government by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act inserted Socialist, Secular, Integrity in Preamble without changing the adoption date and on behalf of the Constituent Assembly, which did not exist in 1976 and even without following due process of law.
The plea further mentioned that the Parliament has power to amend the Constitution but it cannot alter the facts of the Preamble. The plea further pointed out that inserting the word Socialist in the Preamble is problematic as it limits policy choices that can be made by a democratically elected government. What if such a government decides that the market can be useful in achieving some national goals?, the plea questioned.
Additionally, it also remarked that adding something during the black days of emergency and that on behalf of the Constituent Assembly, which did not exist in 1976 is manifestly arbitrary and irrational. Therefore, the Court may declare the words Socialist, Secular and Integrity inoperative.
The matter will be heard in the first week of July.