- Hindi news
- National
- Presidential Reference Bills Timeline Case; Supreme Court | CJI Br Gavai
New Delhi41 minutes ago
- Copy link
Can any deadline be fixed for the approval of the President or Governor on the bills passed by the state assemblies. The matter will be heard in the Supreme Court on Tuesday.
Earlier on July 29, a five -judge bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gawai asked the Center and all the states to submit the written side by August 12. The bench also consists of Justice Suryakant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar.
The bench had reported that on August 19, the initial objections of states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu would be heard by one hour, who have questioned the validity of this President’s reference.
The court said,
On 19, 20, 21 and 26 August, the arguments of the states supporting the center and references will be heard. At the same time, states protesting on August 28 and 2, 3 and 9 will be heard. The counter arguments will be heard on 10 September.
What opinion did President Murmu sought from the Supreme Court…
President Draupadi Murmu had sought an opinion from the Supreme Court under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution in May whether the President or Governor could delay the decision on the Bills indefinitely or a deadline can be set.
On May 15, the President had asked 14 questions from the Supreme Court about the powers of the President and the Governor under Article 200 and 201 in his 5 -page reference. The court has already said that this matter will affect the whole country.
The Supreme Court had fixed 3 months deadline
The case is related to the Supreme Court’s 8 April decision in which the Tamil Nadu government accused the Governor of stopping the bills. The court had clarified that the Governor could not stop any bill under Article 200 and he would have to accept the advice of the Council of Ministers.
4 points of Supreme Court on the bill sent by the Governor to the President
1. Bill must decide: The Supreme Court had said that Article 201 says that when the assembly passes a bill. He should be sent to the Governor and the governor should send him to the President for consideration. In this situation, the President will have to approve the bill or tell that they are not giving approval.
2. Judicial review will be: The Supreme Court had said that the decision of the President under Article 201 could be judged. If the decision of the central government is given priority in the bill, the court will review the bill on the basis of arbitrariness or malicious.
The court said that the state’s cabinet has been given priority in the bill and if the Governor has decided contrary to the assistance and advice of the Council of Ministers, the court will have the right to legally investigate the bill.
3. The state government will have to give the reasons to the Governor: The Supreme Court clarified that when a time-limit is fixed, a decision should be taken within a reasonable time line. It will be mandatory for the President to take a decision within 3 months of receiving the bill. If there is a delay, the reasons for the delay have to be mentioned.
4. Bills cannot be sent back again and again: The court said that the President sends a bill back to the state assembly for amendment or reconsideration. If the assembly passes it again, the President will have to take the final decision on that bill and stop the process of returning the bill again and again.
What has happened on the dispute so far …
17 April: Dhankhar said- courts cannot order the President
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar was addressing a group of Rajya Sabha intern on 17 April. During this time, he objected to the advice of the Supreme Court, in which the President and the governors had set a deadline for approving the bills.
Dhankhar had said- “The courts cannot order the President. The special rights under Article 142 of the Constitution have become 24×7 available nuclear missile against democratic powers. Judges are acting as a super parliamentary.” Read full news …
April 18: Sibal said- President nominal head in India
Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal said that when the executive does not work, the judiciary will have to intervene. The President is the head of the nominal head in India. The President-Governor has to work on the advice of governments. I am surprised to hear the Vice President, I am also sad. They should not talk to any party.
Referring to a decision of the Supreme Court on 24 June 1975, Sibal said- ‘People will remember when the decision on Indira Gandhi’s election came, only one judge, Justice Krishna Iyer ruled. At that time Indira had to lose Sansadi. Then Dhankhar ji approved this. But now the decision of the two -judge bench against the government is being questioned. Read full news …
8 April: Controversy started with this decision of Supreme Court
The Supreme Court had set the limit of the authority of the Governor in the case of the Tamil Nadu Governor and the State Government on 8 April. The bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan had said, “The Governor has no veto power.” The Supreme Court also termed the government’s 10 essential bills being stopped by the Governor as illegal.
During this decision, the court also clarified the situation on the bill sent by the Governors to the President. The Supreme Court had said that the President would have to take a decision on the bill sent by the Governor within 3 months. The order was made public on 11 April. Read full news …