Supreme court and government face to face? Know what is the meaning of the Vice President's statement.
Jagdeep Dhankhar On SC: In the decision to set the timeline for the governor and the President, the supreme Court has used the special powers given under Article 142.
Jagdeep Dhankhar On SC
Vice President jagdeep Dhankhar's statement regarding the interference of the supreme court in the functioning of the government and parliament has become a matter of discussion and debate. In this article, we will try to understand why Dhankhar gave the statement. What did he say in that statement? What are the legal and constitutional dimensions of this whole matter?
Where did the matter start
In a decision given on april 8, the supreme court approved 10 bills that were stopped by the tamil Nadu Governor. In this decision, the court set a time limit for the governor to decide on the bills. The bench of Justice jb Pardiwala and R mahadevan went further and said that if the governor sends a bill to the President for consideration, the President should decide on it within 3 months. If the President does not do so, the state government can approach the court. This part of the decision is currently in controversy.
SC has a missile'
In the decision to set the timeline for the governor and the President, the supreme court has used the special powers given under Article 142. This article gives the court the power to give appropriate orders for complete justice. On this, Vice President Dhankhar has said that the supreme court is using Article 142 like a missile. He even said in his statement that the judiciary should first look at itself. No FIR has been registered so far in the case of cash recovered from the house of a high court judge.
There is no term limit for the President in the Constitution
It is written in Article 201 of the Constitution that if the governor sends a bill for the President's consideration, then the President can either approve that bill or refuse to approve it. No time limit has been set in this article for the President to take a decision, but the supreme Court's decision now states that the President should take a decision on the bill within 3 months.
'See also Article 145'
Vice President and rajya sabha Chairman jagdeep dhankhar has targeted this and said that the supreme court is misusing power. Dhankhar has also raised questions on the decision taken by 2 judges. He has said that under Article 145 (3) of the Constitution, the right to interpret the Constitution is with a Constitution Bench of 5 judges. Dhankhar has also said that there are 34 judges in the supreme Court. According to him, the number of 5 judges is very low. To interpret any aspect related to the Constitution, there should be a decision of the majority of all the judges of the supreme Court. It is not right for a few judges to sit and interfere in the work of Parliament.
What do the lawmakers say
Most legal experts agree that the special power given to the supreme court under Article 142 has its limitations. If the court felt that it was wrong on the part of the governor or the President to not make a timely decision on the bills and that the functioning of the state governments was affected due to this delay, then the court could have advised the government to make a provision in the Constitution. Under Article 361, the President is exempted from any judicial action. It is not right for the court to set a deadline for the President.
Kapil Sibal has a different opinion
However, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, while talking to ABP News, said that there is no flaw in the supreme Court's decision. If the executive does not perform its constitutional duty, then the judiciary will have to intervene. The supreme Court's decision should not be linked to the President. …
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel