Har Sharan Verma v. State of U.P. (1985) AIR 282

HAR SHARAN VERMA V. STATE OF U.P

Whether after the Amendment to Article 173 of the Constitution of India, it was not open to the Governor to appoint a person who was not a member of the Legislature of the State as a Minister?
Whether Article 164(4) of the Constitution of India would only apply to a person who had been a Minister but who ceased to be a member of the Legislature for some reason, such as the setting aside of his election in any election petition?

The Sixteenth Amendment Clause (a) of Article 173 of the Constitution of India was amended by the addition of a clause that required a candidate at an election to the Legislature to make and subscribe before some person had been authorized on that behalf by the Election Commission an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the Third Schedule to the Constitution. adherence to the treaty and international responsibilities. It is one thing to state that Parliament may pass legislation about extraterritorial issues or causes since they affect or have a connection to India.

K.P. Tewari, who had been appointed as a Minister of the Government of Uttar Pradesh under Article 164(1) of the Constitution by the Governor of the State of Uttar Pradesh, was not a member of either House of the State Legislature.
Subsequently, his appointment was challenged by filing a writ petition.
The grievance of the petitioner against that Judgment is that this Court had not considered the effect of the amendment of Article 173(a) of the Constitution by the Constitution (Sixteenth) Amendment Act, 1963.

The Supreme Court held that no material change was brought about because of the amendment of Article 173 (a) of the Constitution in the legal position that a person who is not a member of the State Legislature may be appointed as a Minister.
The object of introducing the amendment in clause (a) of Article 173 of the Constitution was to provide that not only before taking his seat shall a member of the Legislature take the oath prescribed by the Third Schedule as required by Article 188
of the Constitution but that even before standing for election, a candidate must take the same oath. This is to ensure that only a person having allegiance to India shall be eligible for membership in the Legislature.
The petition was thus dismissed by the Supreme Court.