constitutionality and shows that despite such presumption in favour of the legislation, it is unfair, unjust and unreasonable. 47.
Another
most
significant
canon
of
determination
of
constitutionality is that the courts would be reluctant to declare a law invalid or ultra vires on account of unconstitutionality. The courts would accept an interpretation which would be in favour of the constitutionality, than an approach which would render the law unconstitutional. Declaring the law unconstitutional is one of the last resorts taken by the courts.
The courts would
preferably put into service the principle of ‘reading down’ or ‘reading into’ the provision to make it effective, workable and ensure the attainment of the object of the Act.
These are the
principles which clearly emerge from the consistent view taken by this court in its various pronouncements. 48.
The provisions of Section 12(5) do not discuss the basic
qualification needed, but refer to two components: (a) persons of eminence in public life; and (b) with wide knowledge and experience in the fields stated in the provision.
The provision,
thus, does not suffer from the infirmity of providing no criteria resulting in the introduction of the element of arbitrariness or
45