What was the main constitutional question in this case?

Whether Section 8 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 violated Article 3, and if 'proposal' in Article 3's proviso covered later amendments.

Did the Supreme Court require a fresh reference to State legislatures?

No. The amendment (Section 8) was germane to the original subject and did not change the Bill's basic nature; no fresh reference was needed.

What does 'germane to the subject' mean here?

It means the amendment stayed within the same subject of reorganisation. It did not transform the Bill into a different kind of proposal.

What did the Court ultimately decide?

Section 8 was valid. The Act did not contravene Article 3 of the Constitution.

Why is this case important for Article 3?

It clarifies that Parliament can pass relevant amendments without a new State reference if the core subject of the Bill remains the same.

Today: November 01, 2025
info@laweasy.in

Babulal Parate v. The State of Bombay

Law Easy

01 November, 2025

1101

Babulal Parate v. The State of Bombay (AIR 1960 SC 51) — Easy Case Explainer

Babulal Parate v. The State of Bombay

AIR 1960 SC 51 — Easy English Case Explainer

Supreme Court of India 1960 Constitution Bench AIR 1960 SC 51 Constitutional Law ~5 min read

```

Article 3 States Reorganisation Act Section 8 Proposal & Amendments

Author: Gulzar Hashmi India Published: 25 Oct 2025 Slug: babulal-parate-v-the-state-of-bombay

```

Comment

Nothing for now

About Us

LawEasy is your ultimate resource for law exam preparation, offering comprehensive materials, expert guidance, and practice tests to ensure your success. Join our community to achieve your legal career goals with ease and confidence.

Useful Links

Contact

34 Westend Marg Saket New Delhi 110030

info@laweasy.in

+91 836 832 4411 , 91402 72853

In order to get the latest news and other great items, please subscribe us here:

Babulal Parate v. The State of Bombay

Share

Comment

Related Post

Tags

Archive

Popular & Recent Post