Architecture, Structure, Bricks and Walls

The Basic Structure of Katrina Kaif

In Re: Daksh

The Basic Structure Doctrine has an able critic in Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran [RR].

Christmas Comedy Night with RNR

RR: “When you talk of a Structure, four professions are involved – architecture, civil and structural engineering, masonry and brick laying.”

RNR: Let’s see. Katrina Kaif – Architecture (God’s Contribution, Genes), Engineering (Gym, Diet), Masonry (Clothes, Bags, Shoes, Caps) and Brick Laying (Experiences, Memories). Got it!

RR: “While analyzing the Basic Structure, how can one forget the architecture, the design and just come down to the individual bricks?”

RNR: While analyzing the Basic Structure of Katrina Kaif, how can one forget God’s Contribution, Genes and just come down to Experiences, Memories [Lovers]! True. the Constitution is a Living, Breathing Katrina. 

RR: “When you hit at Basic Structure, are you going to look at a) how the architecture is damaged? b) how the Structure is damaged? or c) the colour/quality of individual bricks and say that if one brick is replaced by another, the Basic Structure is violated.”

RNR: When you hit at the Basic Structure of Katrina Kaif, a) are you going to look at how she is carrying a Louis Vuitton instead of a Michael Korr, b) how she is eating Hamburgers? or c) are you going to look at the Colour/Quality of Experiences, Memories? 

RNR EGO: What is this! If I replace some of the bricks, the structure being architecturally the same, are you really going to tell me I changed the Basic Structure by replacing the bricks? 

RNR: Of course! 

RR: “Now, therefore, we are coming to bricks and we don’t confine ourselves to the Structure.”

RNR: Of course! Brick/Experiences/Memories are Basic to Structure.

“Independence of Judiciary is part of the Basic Structure, and that Appointment of Judges is an integral part of the concept of Independence of Judiciary.”

 – Hon’ble Justice Kurian Joseph.

RR: “Institutional Majority to Judiciary [3]; Institutional Minority to the Executive [1] and Civil Society [2] = Primacy? Apparently not.”

RNR: SCAORA v. UOI, 2015 (11) SCALE 1. I must say, your ‘apparently not‘ is as good as ‘obvious reasons‘.

“Role of the Law Minister and the Non-Judge Members cannot be placed at par with the Chief Justice and Judges of the Supreme Court. They cannot be compared for obvious reasons.”

– Hon’ble Justice A.K. Goel.

Story of Bricks