Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2023 DIGILAW 62 (SC)

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India

2023-01-13

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA

body2023
ORDER 1. Invoking the jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought a direction to the Union government to (i) take steps to constitute the Twenty Second Law Commission of India; and (ii) make the Law Commission a statutory body. 2. We have heard Mr Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, in-person and Mr R Venkataramani, Attorney General for India. 3. The Attorney General states that the Twenty Second Law Commission has been constituted by two notifications dated 9 and 10 November 2022. 4. The petitioner, as noted above, also seeks a direction 'to make Law Commission of India a statutory body'. Such a direction would necessarily implicate a writ of mandamus being issued to Parliament in its legislative capacity. It is a settled position of law that a writ cannot be issued to Parliament to enact a law. This pertains exclusively to the legislative domain. Hence, we decline to entertain the Petition for the subsequent part of the relief as claimed. 5. The final relief which is claimed in the Petition is for the Law Commission to prepare a report in the matter of confiscating black money, benami properties and disproportionate assets. 6. Mr Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay states that the relief as sought in prayer (c) is not pressed since the petitioner would independently pursue his request before the Law Commission. 7. The Petition shall accordingly stand disposed of. 8. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.