Article 239 of the Costitution of India with Case law
🔹 Article 239 of the Constitution of India – Administration of Union Territories
📘 Text of Article 239
Article 239(1):
Every Union Territory shall be administered by the President, through an Administrator appointed by him with such designation as he may specify.
Proviso (Amended by 7th Amendment):
The President may appoint the Governor of a State as the Administrator of an adjoining Union Territory, but in that capacity, the Governor acts independently of the State’s Council of Ministers.
Article 239(2):
No court shall question the validity of anything done or omitted by the Administrator if it was done in good faith in pursuance of the President’s directions.
🧾 Key Features of Article 239
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Scope | Applies to all Union Territories except where special provisions apply (e.g., Delhi, Puducherry) |
| Administrator | Appointed by the President; may or may not be the Governor |
| Power Source | President, not elected legislature |
| Good Faith Clause | Protects acts done under Presidential direction from legal challenge if done in good faith |
🗺️ Special Cases under Other Articles
| Union Territory | Special Article | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Delhi | Article 239AA | Has a Legislative Assembly with limited powers |
| Puducherry | Article 239A | Also has a Legislative Assembly |
| J&K, Ladakh | Administered under Article 239 post-2019 |
⚖️ Important Case Laws on Article 239
🔹 Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India, (2018) 8 SCC 501
Issue: Whether the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi has independent decision-making powers.
Held:
Though Delhi is a Union Territory, under Article 239AA, it has a legislature and CM.
LG must act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, except in matters of land, police, and public order.
Relevance: Article 239 is not absolute where special provisions exist (like 239AA for Delhi).
🔹 Devji Vallabhbhai Tandel v. Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu, AIR 1982 SC 1029
Facts: Challenge to an act of the Administrator in land matters.
Held:
Acts of Administrator done in good faith and under Presidential direction are protected by Article 239(2).
Relevance: Reinforced the validity shield for acts done by Administrators under central instructions.
🔹 T. M. Kanniyan v. I.T.O., Pondicherry, AIR 1968 SC 637
Facts: Whether Union Territory laws need Presidential assent like State laws.
Held:
Laws made for Union Territories under Article 239 do not require Presidential assent in the same way as State laws.
Relevance: Clarified legislative procedures under Article 239.
🔹 Lakshadweep Development Authority Case (2021) – Ongoing
Context: Central government’s sweeping control over Lakshadweep UT through Administrator's orders was challenged.
Relevance: Raises constitutional questions on democratic accountability in UTs administered under Article 239.
✅ Summary Table
| Clause | Subject | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| 239(1) | UTs to be administered by President through Administrator | Centralized control |
| Proviso | Governor of a State may act as Administrator of UT | In personal capacity |
| 239(2) | Acts under President’s direction in good faith protected | Judicial immunity clause |
📝 Conclusion
Article 239 establishes central control over Union Territories, distinguishing them from States. It ensures that UTs, which do not enjoy full statehood, are administered efficiently and directly by the Union government, either through appointed Administrators or Governors. However, in cases like Delhi and Puducherry, where special provisions exist, Article 239 is subordinated to Articles 239AA and 239A respectively.
RELATED Blog
0 comments