UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIES

College of legal studies

Project :- right to form association & reasonable
Restriction on it

submitted to :-

Mr. Aravindan Anandan

submitted by :-

Ebad khan
R450213041
Sec a

Acknowledgement
The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance from many people and I am extremely fortunate to have got this all along the completion of my project work.
I respect and thank Mr. Aravindan Anandan , for giving me an opportunity to do the project work on “RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION
& REASONABLE RESTRICTION ON IT” and providing support and guidance which made me complete the project on time. I am extremely grateful to him for providing such a nice support and guidance though he is having a busy schedule in managing the college affairs.
I would not forget to remember Mr. ANURAG PANDEY , my senior who gave constructive ideas for the project and helped me with the presentation part of the project.
I am thankful to and fortunate enough to get constant encouragement, support and guidance from my parents who helped me in successfully completing our project work. Also, I would like to extend our sincere regards to the staff of department of library for their timely support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS :CHAPTER – 1 :





INTRDUCTION

RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION
RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION AND GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION AND ARMED FORCES
REASONABLE RESTRICTION

CHAPTER – 2 :

GROUNDS ON WHICH RESTRICTION IS IMPOSED

 SOVEREIGNTY & INTEGRITY OF INDIA
 PUBLIC ORDER
 MORALITY

CHAPTER – 3 :

WHY RESONABLE RESTRICTION IS NEEDED

CHAPTER – 4 :

PROCEDURE FOR THE RESTRICTION

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Introduction :-

RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATION :- It is a fundamental Right given in the
Constitution Of India under Article 19 (1)(c) , It proclaims that all citizens shall have the freedom to form associations or unions . The right to form associations or unions has a very wide and varied scope including all types of associations political parties , clubs, soceities organizations , trade unions and indeed every body of persons . The right to form associations indicates that several individuals get together and form voluntarily an association with a common aim, legitimate purpose and having a community of interest and this Right extends inter alia to the formation of an association or union1 .
This Right implies that the persons making an association have the right to continue to be associated with only those whom they voluntarily admitted in the association . It was decided in Damayanti v. union of india2 that any law by which members are introduced in the voluntary association without any option being given to the members to keep them out will be a law violating the Right to form an association . In this case the Court did not approve the taking over of
Hindi Sahitya Sammelan by the State and introduction of some members without
1
2

SINGH MAHENDRA P. , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, eastern book company ( ELEVENTH EDITION, 2010 ). p. 147
AIR 1971 SC 966

the consent of existing members . It was held to be an unconstitutional interference with the guaranteed freedom of association. When the Government of Assam
Rastrabhasa Prachar Samity by a notification , the supreme court quashed it as illegal and unconstitutional being violative of Article 19(1)(c) 3 . Governement cannot take over an association completely , depriving its members and office bearers to hold on to association , which they formed to carry on the goals and objectives .
The right to form associations does not involve or carry with the concomitant right that such union should be able to attain the objects which might be supposed to underline the formation of an association . thus , to illustrate the right to form trade unions should not lead to the conclusion that trade unions have a guaranteed right to an effective collective bargaining or to strike either as a part of collective bargaining or otherwise4 . The Right to strike or the right to declare a lock – out may be controlled or restricted by an appropriate industrial legislation and the validity of such legislation would have to be tested not with refrence to the criteria laid down in clause (4) of article 19 , but by totally different considerations . The court has reaffirmed this position in several decisions upholding the laws that took over an activity or institution run by an association or registered society and vested it in statutory bodies . such taking over and vesting , the court held , may be
3
4

Asom Rashtrabhasa Prachar Samity v. State of Assam AIR 1989 SC 2127
SINGH MAHENDRA P. , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, eastern book company ( ELEVENTH EDITION, 2010 ). p. 149

examined with refrence to other provisions of the Constitution but not under
Article 19(1)(c) because the right under Article 19(1)(c) is exhausted on the formation and continuation of the association or union . Any restrictions on its formation and continuation will however, be judged under article 19(4) and will have to satisfy its requirement.

FREEOM OF ASSOCIATION & GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES :CASE :
In P.Balakotaiah Vs Union of India5 raised the question whether Rules 3 and 7,
Railway Service (Safeguarding of National Security) Rules, 1949 violated Article
19(1)(c). The appellants contended that their services were terminated because they were communists and trade unionists and consequently the orders terminating their services under Rule 3 amounted in substance to denial to them of the freedom to form associations. The appellants were informed that they had carried on agitation among the Railway workers for a general strike with a view to paralyse communications and the movement of essential supplies and thereby create disorder and confusion in the country. As their services were terminated the appellant’s fist moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Their
5

AIR 1958, SC 232

contention was that Railway Services (Safeguarding National Security) Rules,
1949 contravened Articles 14, 19(1)(c) and 311 of the Constitution and as such the orders terminating their services were void.
Their petitions were dismissed by the High Court. Their appeals were also dismissed by the Supreme Court which held that the charge shows that action was taken against the appellants not because they were communists or trade unionists but because they were engaged in subversive activities. The orders terminating their services did not contravene Article 19(1)(c) as they did not infringe any of the rights of the appellants guaranteed by that Article which remained precisely what they were before. The appellants had a fundamental right to form association but they had no fundamental right to be continued in Government service. The order did not prevent from continuing to be in the Communist Party or being trade unionists. RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION & ARMED FORCES :CASE :
In O.K.A. Nair v. Union of India6 an important question arose whether "civilian" employees. designated as non-combatants such as cooks, chowkidars, laskers, barbers, mechanics, boot-makers, tailors, etc., attached to the Defence
6

AIR 1976 SC 1179

Establishments have a right to form associations or unions. The appellants were members of the civil employees unions in the various centres of the Defence
Establishment. The Commandant declared their unions as unlawful associations.
They challenged that the impugned action was violative of their fundamental right to form associations or unions under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution. They contended that the members of the unions, though attached to the Defence
Establishments were civilians and their service conditions were regulated by Civil
Service Rules and therefore they could not be called "members of the Armed
Forces" within the meaning of Article 33 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court rejected the plea of appellants and held that the civilian employees of the Defence
Establishments answer the description of the members of the Armed Forces within the meaning of Article 33 and therefore, were not entitled to form trade unions. It is their duty to follow or accompany the Armed Personnel on active service or in camp or on march. Although they are non-combatants and in some matters governed by the Civil Service Rules, yet they are integral to Armed Forces.
Consequently, under Army Act the Central Government was competent to make rules restricting or curtailing their fundamental right under Article 19(1)(c).

REASONABLE RESTRICTION ON IT :-

Article 19(1)(c) guaranteed the

right to form association , this does not mean that any one could claim a right to

hold office for life as an integral part of this fundamental right . Neither the association nor the members can claim such right is fundamental . Legislature cannot impose more limitations than prescribed under these provisions .
Essential elements of these Restrictions Are as Follows :
1. Restriction can be imposed only by or under the authority of law. It cannot be imposed by the Executive action without legal authority.
2. The Restriction must be Reasonable .
3. Restriction must be related to the purpose specifically mentioned in the clause. 4. The Judiciary has the power to test the validity of these restrictions on two grounds . firstly – whether the restriction is reasonable or secondly whether it is for the purpose mentioned in the clause under which the restriction is being imposed ? Legislative determination as to reasonableness is not final
And it is subjected to Judicial scrunity.
Like any other Fundamental Right under Article 19 , this right to association is also not absolute and is subjected to regulation in social interest . Article 19(4) specifically empowers the state to make any law to fetter , abridge or abrogate any of the rights under Article 19(1)(c). Clause (4) empowers the state to impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of Right to Form Association , in the interest

of the sovereignty and integrity of India, Public order and Morality , Here Public order means Public peace , safety and Tranquility .
In Ramakrishna v. the President district Board , Nellore7 the Madras High Court held that the restriction that the teachers should join only an officially approved association was an unreasonable and hence unconstitutional restriction by the
Government .
In L.N. Mishra Institute of Social Changes v. State of Bihar8 , the Supreme
Court held taking over the institution by making law called Bihar Private
Educational Institution ( Taking Over ) Act, 1987 , the Government did not infringe the right to form association , as there was no restriction on the functioning of the society , right of the society remained unimpaired and uinterfered by the Act . It is true that the society has lost its Right of management of the institute and its control but that was the consequence of all taking over.
To impose Reasonable Restriction on Freedom It should be the last Remedy.

7
8

AIR 1952 Mad 253
AIR 1988 SC 1145

GROUNDS ON WHICH Art 19(1)(c) gets Restricted :The right of association like other individual freedom is not unrestricted. Clause
(4) of Article 19 empowers the State to impose reasonable restrictions on the right of freedom of association and union in the interest of "Public Order" or
"Morality" or "Sovereignty or Integrity" of India. It saves existing laws in so far as they are not inconsistent with fundamental right of association. These are the
Three Grounds on which Right to form get Restricted.

1. SOVEREIGNTY OR INTEGRITY OF INDIA :- This Ground has been added by the Constitution (16th Ammendment ) Act, 1963. To safeguard the
Sovereignty & integrity of India Right to form Association can be
Restricted. Thus, it will be legitimate for Parliament under this clause to
Restrict the Right to Form Association if it preaches secession of any part of the territory of India from the Union . It may be noted that the Restriction is with respect to the territorial integrity of India and not about the preservation of the territorial integrity of the constituent states9.

9

BAKSHI P.M. , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA , Universal law publication , ( TENTH EDITION 2010 ). pp. 35-36

2. PUBLIC ORDER :- The Expression “Public Order” is synonymous with
Public Peace , safety, and Tranquility It signifies absence of disorder involving breaches of local significance in contradiction to National upheavals such as revolution , civil strife of war , affecting the security of the state . To illustrate , the state may , in the interest of public order, prohibit and punish the causing of loud and raucous noise in streets and public places by means of sound amplifying instruments ; regulate the hours and place of public discussions and the use of public streets for the purpose of exercising freedom ; provide for expulsion of hecklers from meetings and assemblies ; punish utterances tending to incite breach of the peace or riot and use of threatening , abusive or insulting words or behavior in any public place or at any public meeting with intent to cause a breach of the peace or whereby breach of the peace is likely to be caused , and all such Acts as would endanger public safety.
It is necessary that there must be reasonable and proper nexus or relationship between the restriction and the achievement of Public order . If the
Restriction has no proximate relationship to the achievement of

Public

order, it cannot be sustained on that ground . The Restriction must not be far- fetched , hypothetical or problematic or too remote in the chain of its relation with Public Order.

3. MORALITY :-

Morality is another Ground on which this Freedom may

be Reasonably Restricted . Morality is the Lack of Obscenity . Obscenity becomes a subject of Constitutional interest since it illustrates well the clash between the Right of the individual or association to freely express his opinions and the duty of the state to safeguard the Morals.

As Clause (4) empowers the state to impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of Right to Form Association , in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, Public order and Morality and Judiciary has the power to test the validity of these restrictions on two grounds . firstly – whether the restriction is reasonable or secondly whether it is for the purpose mentioned in the clause under which the restriction is being imposed if These two conditions not fulfilled then Restiction can not be imposed .

CASE :- The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1908, as amended by the
Madras Act, 1950, provides that if the State Government is of opinion that any association interferes with the administration of law or with the maintenance of law and order or that it constitutes a danger to the public peace it may, by notification in the Official Gazette declare such association

to be unlawful. Such a notification was to be placed before an Advisory
Board. Representation against such a notification could be made. If the
Advisory Board was of opinion that the association was not unlawful the
Government was to cancel the notification.
The validity of the above Act was challenged in the case of State of v. V.G.
Rao Madras10, The Supreme Court held that the restrictions imposed by
Section 15(2)(b) of the Act were unreasonable, The test under it was subjective satisfaction of the Government and the factual existence of the grounds was not a justiciable issue. Therefore, the vesting of power in the
Government to impose restriction on this right, without allowing the grounds tested in a judicial enquiry, was a strong element to be taken into consideration in judging the reasonableness of the restrictions on the right to form association or union. The existence of an Advisory Board could not be a substitute for judicial inquiry.
But a Government order requiring municipal teachers not to join unions other than those officially approved was held to impose prior restraint on the right to form association and union, which was in the nature of administrative censorship, and hence invalid .

10

AIR (1952) SC 196

WHY REASONABLE RESTRICTION IS NEEDED ?
The Constitution Of India has Guaranteed Freedoms under Article 19. All the
Freedoms guaranteed under Article 19 does not confer an absolute Right to do what is mentioned in their respective Articles because if they will be absolute then it will create many Problems related to the working and functioning of the
Government like in case of Emergencies, maintaining Friendly relations with
Foreign countries, Public order, morality etc. and thus will create many Hurdles.
So, by putting Reasonable Restriction on it all the Problems and Hurdles will be sorted out easily.
The Right to form Association is a Freedom given in Article 19(1)(c) if we do not have any Restriction on this freedom then many problems might arise like:
(1). Many kinds of association would form and they can be terrorist association or any other type of association and Government would not be able to ban these associations as it is a freedom Guaranteed by the Constitution.
(2). As Association is Formed they will have oneness among themselves so they can do Hartals or can even do protest for anything or for what they want, so
Government will have to face many problems as they can’t do anything like if there is a Labour association and their salaries are not increased so they would

announce one day of Bandh , Government cannot do anything and because of that a lot of loss has to be faced .
(3). In case of Emergencies ,it is Proclaimed when there is War , external aggression , armed rebellion or in case of Failure of Constitutional machinery in a state or if there is Financial stability and in all these situations if every citizen has the Right to use their Freedom given then The whole mechanism of the
Government or the functioning Machinery of the Government cannot run , or we can say that Government cannot run the Country11.
Hence , Reasonable Restriction is needed because if it is not there then no
Government can run a country ,as in its absence these freedoms become Absolute
Rights , and absolute means which cannot be challenged , so these freedoms would also be not challanged . So, Reasonable Restriction is Important , if Constitution is
Providing such type of freedoms.

11

BAKSHI P.M. , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA , Universal law publication , ( TENTH EDITION 2010 ). pp. 38-39

PROCEDURE FOR THE RESTRICTION :-

The procedure to impose Restriction is very simple , if The Right to Form
Association Guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) is creating any Problem related to
Sovereignty or integrity of India, Public Order or Morality Then Legislature can pass law which must be Reasonable and achieving the Purpose specifically mentioned in Clause 4 of the Constitution of India to restrict the freedom . The restriction cannot be imposed by the Executive action without Legal authority and the Judiciary has the power to test the validity of these restrictions on two grounds. firstly – whether the restriction is reasonable or secondly whether it is for the purpose mentioned in the clause under which the restriction is being imposed .
When all these conditions are fulfilled then only Restriction could be imposed on this freedom otherwise it cannot.
The Legislative determination as to reasonableness is not final And it is subjected to Judicial scrunity, It means whether the restriction is reasonable or not is the duty of Judiciary.
Hence to test the validity of Restriction Judiciary has the only power and if
Judiciary claims it to be reasonable or valid then such restriction is valid .

Conclusion :-

Reasonable Restriction is very important because The Freedom Right to form association Given in The Constitution can create many problems because if restriction is not there it will be absolute then it will create many Problems related to the working and functioning of the Government like in case of Emergencies, maintaining Friendly relations with Foreign countries, Public order, morality etc. and thus will create many Hurdles. So, by putting Reasonable Restriction on it all the Problems and Hurdles can be sorted out easily.
But Government should look that the Restrictions which they are making must be reasonable and not just for their own cause. Judiciary plays an important role because they have the only power to test the validity of restriction, Thus we can say that Reasonable Restriction is important and is needed to run a country.

BIBLIOGRAPHY : BAKSHI P.M. , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA , Universal law publication ,
(TENTH EDITION 2010 ).

 SINGH MAHENDRA P. , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, eastern book company ( ELEVENTH EDITION, 2010 ).

 Right to form Association Detailed essay available at http://www.preservearticles.com/2011111216878/essay-on-the-right-toform-associations-or-unions-in-india.html  Reasonable Restriction Grounds Available at http://www.indialawjournal.com/volume3/issue_4/article_by_dheerajendra.h tml