FACTS
A parliamentary referred case regarding an agreement (Indo-Pakistan agreement, also called Nehru-Noon agreement) concerning the ownership of the Berubari region in the Jalpaiguri district of West Bengal setting the boundary dispute.
ISSUES
- Is any Legislative action necessary for the implementation of the Nehru-Noon Agreement?
- Is Article 3 of the Indian Constitution sufficient for the purpose or is an amendment in accordance with Article 368 necessary, in addition, or in alternative?
DECISION
The Supreme Court observed the treaty-making power of a Sovereign State.
Cession of National territory in law amounts to the transfer of sovereignty over the said territory by the owner state in favor of another state.
The Supreme Court further observed that Part 1 of the Constitution deals with the Union and Its territories.
Separate provision had been made by Article 243 in Part IX for the administration of territories specified in Part D and other territories such as newly acquired territories such as newly acquired territories which were not comprised in the First Schedule.
The acquisition of foreign territory by India in exercise of its inherent right as a sovereign state automatically makes the said territory a part of the territory in India. After such territory is thus acquired and factually made a part of the territory of India the process of law assimilates it either under Article 2 or under Article 3 (a) or (b).
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 any part of Indian Territories.
Since the Berubai Union was a part of West Bengal and not any offer. Being part of Union, it was necessary to cede a part of the territory according to laws and not through treaties or agreement.
ANSWERS TO ABOVE QUESTIONS:
Is any Legislative action necessary for the implementation of the Nehru-Noon Agreement?
It was necessary to take legislative action related to Berubari Union.
Is Article 3 of the Indian Constitution sufficient for the purpose or is an amendment in accordance with Article 368 necessary, in addition, or in alternative?
It was necessary and competent to cede a part of the State under Article 368.
In conclusion, The Parliament to cede a part of territory of India, foremost it must amend Article 3 as per Article 368, because Article 3 is not competent to reorganize any part of India in favor of foreign territory.