Central
Section 2 of The Union Territories (Separation of Judicial and Executive Functions) Act, 1969
In sections 3 to 9, "Union territory" means any Union territory other than the Union territory of Chandigarh.
Summary
- This section defines the term Union territory as it is used throughout sections 3 to 9 of this Act.
- It covers all Union territories under this definition.
- It specifically excludes the Union territory of Chandigarh from the scope of this definition.
Practical examples
1In Delhi, an administrator named Vikram wants to see if the new magistrate classification in section 3 of this Act applies to his area. Since Delhi is a Union territory and is not Chandigarh, this definition applies, meaning the rule does apply to Delhi on October 2, 1969.
2In Chandigarh, an executive officer named Meera wants to know if the newly defined powers in section 5 apply to her local court system. Because Chandigarh is explicitly excluded from this definition of a Union territory, these specific provisions do not apply to her jurisdiction.
FAQ
1. Does this definition of Union territory apply to the entire Act?
No, this definition is specifically restricted to sections 3 to 9 of this Act.
2. Is Chandigarh considered a Union territory under sections 3 to 9 of this Act?
No, Chandigarh is explicitly excluded from the definition of a Union territory for the purposes of these sections.
Test yourself
Q1.Which sections of this Act are governed by the definition of Union territory in Section 2?
Q2.Which specific territory is excluded from the definition of a Union territory in this provision?
Q3.Under Section 2, what does the term Union territory mean in sections 3 to 9?
Q4.Does the definition in Section 2 apply to Section 1 of the Act?
Q5.If a new Union territory is established, does it fall under this definition if it is not Chandigarh?