With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements:
I. An Ordinance can amend any Central Act.
II. An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right.
III. An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Answer:
(c)
Easy
Core Books
Core Books/NCERT
Statement I: An Ordinance can amend any Central Act – Correct Ordinances have the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament (Article 123). Hence, they can amend or repeal any existing law, including Central Acts. Example: Banking Regulation (Amendment) Ordinance 2020 amended the existing Act. Source: Laxmikanth – Indian Polity, Chapter on Ordinance-making power of the President. Statement II: An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right – ❌ Incorrect Article 13(2): The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges Fundamental Rights. Ordinances are considered “law” under Article 13, hence cannot violate Fundamental Rights. Supreme Court (1956, RC Cooper case & later): Ordinance-making power cannot override Fundamental Rights. Source: Indian Constitution – Article 13 & Article 123, Laxmikanth, and SC rulings. Statement III: An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date – Correct Ordinances can be given retrospective effect just like Parliamentary laws. There is no constitutional bar on the retrospective application of an Ordinance. Source: Laxmikanth, Doctrine of Retrospective Legislation in Indian Polity.