Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J., S.H. Kapadia, R.V. Raveendran, B. Sudershan Reddy and P. Sathasivam

JUDGMENT

B. Sudershan Reddy, J.

1. This writ application under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has been filed by a Member of Lok Sabha, challenging the validity of the proceedings in the Lok Sakha commencing from 29^th January, 2004 on the ground that the President has not addressed both Houses of Parliament as envisaged under Article 87 of the Constitution. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue appropriate Writ or direction or order declaring that the Session of the Lok Sabha called by the Notice dated January 20, 2004 is the first Session in the year 2004; and the proceedings of the Lok Sabha pursuant to the Notice dated 20^th January, 2004 are unconstitutional, illegal, null and void.

2. The case set up by the petitioner is that the Session commenced on 29^th January, 2004 was the first Session of the Lok Sabha in the year 2004, and there was no address by the President informing the Parliament, the cause of its summons as provided for and required under Article 87(1) of the Constitution of India. The contention of the petitioner was that the "first Session" means, the Session, which is held first in point of time in a given year. According to him, the Session, which commenced on 29^th January, 2004 was the first Session of the House of the year 2004. The sittings thereafter continued up to 5^th February, 2004.

3. There is no dispute before us that the Fourteenth Session of the Thirteenth Lok Sabha commenced on 2^nd December, 2003 and was adjourned sine die on 23^rd December, 2003. Thereafter on 20^th January, 2004, the Secretary General of the Lok Sabha, by way of a Notice informed all the Members of the Thirteenth Lok Sabha, duly stating that under Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha, the Speaker has directed that the Lok Sabha, which was adjourned sine die on 23^rd December, 2003 will resume its sittings on 29^th January, 2004.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in terms of mandatory requirement as provided for in Article 87(1) of the Constitution of India, the President has to address both Houses of Parliament at the commencement of the Session every year and inform the