Close Menu
LawLex.OrgLawLex.Org
  • Lex Bulletin
    • Call for Papers
    • Conference
    • Essay Writing
    • News
    • Seminar
    • Moot Court
  • Lex Pedia
    • Lex Articles
    • Lex Review
  • Internships
    • Internship Experience
    • Internship Opportunities
  • Career
    • Career Advice
    • Career Opportunities
  • Courses
    • Classroom Courses
    • Distance Courses
    • Online Courses
  • International Events
  • Videos
  • Misc
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Tuesday, September 22
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
LawLex.OrgLawLex.Org
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Our Team
    • Campus Ambassadors
  • News
  • Lex Pedia
    • Lex Articles
    • Lex Review
  • Lex Bulletin
    • Call for Papers
    • Courses
    • Career
    • Internships
    • Interviews
    • CLAT
    • MUN
  • YouTube
  • News
  • Work With Us
  • Contribute
    • Log In
LawLex.OrgLawLex.Org
Re Berubari Union Case Analysis
Case Analysis

Re Berubari Union Case Analysis

Nikita SinhaBy Nikita SinhaJan 28, 2023No Comments6 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

INTRODUCTION

In the Supreme Court of India
Citation: AIR 1960 SC 845
Decided on March 14 1960
Bench: B.P. Sinha, S.K Das, P.B. Gajendragadkar, A.K. Sarkar, K. Subba, M.
Hidaytullah, K.C. Das Gupta, J.C. Shah

Cession or ceding a territory is transferring or giving up territory to the other foreign entity. This can be achieved when a nation loses a war, enters an agreement, signs a treaty with a foreign nation, etc. It is a crucial step that a unified nation carries. India, a sovereign state has every right to enter into such an arrangement either to acquire or cede its territories. These rights have been observed in the case of Re Berubari Union, AIR 1960, by a seven-judge bench. It was linked to the India-Pakistan conflict over the Berubari. The case clarified which articles of the Constitution of India lays down the provisions for the reorganisation of the territories of India.

BACKGROUND

Berubari, an 8.57 square miles town, was situated in the district of Jalpaiguri which at the period was part of the Rajshahi division. It was deemed to be a part of West Bengal, India. The dispute over Berubari between India and Pakistan has been rooted since the demarcation of boundaries of both nations by Sir Radcliff. India was awarded the Berubari by Sir Radcliff which became part of West Bengal after the enactment of the constitution.

The acquisition of Berubari was challenged by Pakistan arguing that it falls in East Bengal, which then was part of Pakistan. Boundary disputes arose between India and Pakistan which led to the formation of the Indo-Pakistan boundaries disputes Tribunal in 1948. Nothing happened for the next two years. In 1950, the question was raised by Pakistan about Berubari. The dispute remained alive till 1958 when the Prime Ministers of both nations settled to divide Berubari Union into two halves horizontally.

ISSUE

Soon after the agreement, the decision of the division was challenged in a court of law. It was then that the President of India referred three questions of laws to the Supreme Court, by exercising his power by Article 143(1). Following are the questions raised before the Supreme Court of India:

(1) Is any legislative action necessary for the implementation of the Agreement relating to the Berubari Union?
(2) If so, is a law of Parliament relatable to article 3 of the Constitution sufficient for the purpose or is an amendment of the Constitution in accordance with article 368 of the Constitution necessary, in addition, or the alternative?
(3) Is a law of Parliament relatable to article 3 of the Constitution sufficient for implementation of the agreement relating to the Exchange of Enclaves or is an amendment of the Constitution in accordance with article 368 of the Constitution necessary for the purpose, in addition, or in the alternative?”

LEGAL PROVISIONS DISCUSSED IN THE CASE

PART 1 of the constitution of India explains the provisions related to states and the Union The territory of India. It consists of four articles, i.e. Articles 1 to 4. The articles have been briefly discussed below:

Article 1
The article defines the name and territory of India. As per this India is a  “union of states” which will also be called Bharat. The states and territories shall be specified in the first schedule. And the territories will comprise of  the states, union territories, and any other territories which may be acquired by India.

Also Read:  CASE ANALYSIS: I.R.Coelho V. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 2007 SC 861

Article 2
This article supplies power to the parliament to add or establish a new state into the union. It is concerned with the territories which are not part of India.

Article 3
According to this article, the parliament of India may by law has the authority to form any new states or alter the area, boundaries or names of existing states. The term “State” in the article also includes “Union territory”.

Article 4
It states that any law referred to in Articles 2 or 3 shall include the regulations necessary to change the 1st Schedule and IV Schedule to give effect to the provisions of the law. In the case of Mangal Singh v. Union of India, the court observed that when the parliament exercise power under article 2 and 3, then this may change or amends the First Schedule of the Constitution. The first schedule sets out the States name and description of territories.

Article 368
It gives the power to the parliament of India to amend the constitution. The article provides unrestricted powers to the parliament to amend the constitution.  However, the judiciary through several verdicts has tried to remind the parliament about the basic structure of doctrine. The doctrine puts limits on parliament that it cannot amend the fundamental structure of the constitution.

JUDGMENT

Following are the observation made by the Honorable Supreme Court after hearing the statements of both sides and considering all the relevant facts:

  • India is a sovereign state and has the power to amend Constitution under article 368. This infers that parliament can without any limit amend article 1, and can include the power to cede the territories of India in favour of any foreign state. Therefore, it rejects the contention of Mr Chatterjee that parliament has no right to cede any part of Indian territory or even pass any amendment.
  • Since it was found that the Berubari union was a part of West Bengal and not any offer. Being part of the Union, it was necessary to cede a part of the territory according to laws and not through treaties or agreements.
  • The first answer to the question referred to by the President was “Yes”. That means it was necessary to take legislative action related to the Berubari Union.
  • To answer the second question, the court observed that it is necessary and competent to cede a part of the state under article 368.
  • In dealing with the third question, the court was of the view that parliament to cede a part of the territory of India, foremost it must amend article 3 of the constitution as per article 368. Because article 3 is not competent to reorganise any part of India in favour of foreign territory. Hence, parliament has no power to cede a part of India in favour of a foreign state under article 3(c) of the constitution unless it is amended.

CONCLUSION
There are several instances when the government has sought pieces of advice from the Honorable Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of any law. In Re Berubari Union, the court has clarified such inquiry of the government. It provided all the provisions related to ceding any part of the Union in favour of any foreign territory. That is now India can cede its territory to any other foreign state after passing an amendment under article 368. About the matter constitution was silent until then.

Blog case analysis Case Summary Ceding Cession Constitution of India Constitutional amendment Re Berubari Union Supreme Court
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Call for Blogs
Call for Blogs
Support Us

Please enter a description

USD

Please enter a price

Please enter an Invoice ID

WRITE A CASE SUMMARY
CATEGORIES
Recent Posts
  • Legal Research Internship at Office of Advocate Pooja Gala, Thane
  • Call for Applications: Policy Pioneers Program by India House
  • Judiciary Comprehensive Foundation Batch by Kahlon Law Academy
  • Call for Chapters: New Horizons of Justice – Navigating the Legal Landscape of Artificial Intelligence
  • Beyond Reasonable Doubt Still Holds: SC Clarifies Interplay Between POCSO & Evidence Law

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stories handpicked for you.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and won't spam you

Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved. For collaborations contact mail.lawlex@gmail.com

All Rights Reserved!
  • Front Page
  • About Us
  • Advertising
  • Calendar
  • Contribute
  • Lawlex Campus Ambassadors
  • Lawlex YT Channel
  • Log In
  • Newsletter
    Featured
    Recent

    Legal Research Internship at Office of Advocate Pooja Gala, Thane

    Sep 22, 2026

    Call for Applications: Policy Pioneers Program by India House

    Sep 22, 2026

    Judiciary Comprehensive Foundation Batch by Kahlon Law Academy

    Sep 21, 2026
  • Our Team
  • Privacy Policy
  • Register
  • Support Us
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Work With Us
  • Your Profile

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.