The Supreme Court will hear the issue of tying the President and the Governor within the time limit to take a decision on the bills from August 19. The Constitution Bench of 5 judges headed by the Chief Justice has asked all the parties to file a written reply on the Presidential Reference sent by the President by August 12.
What is the matter?
In April this year, a verdict was given by the Supreme Court in the case of pending 10 Bills of Tamil Nadu to the Governor and the President. The bench of 2 judges had termed all the bills as perfect. Also said that the Governor and the President should take a decision within the stipulated time. If this does not happen, the court can interfere. The President has sought legal advice from the Supreme Court regarding this decision.
President’s question
By sending Presidential References under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution, President Draupadi Murmu has asked these 14 questions from the Supreme Court:-
- When a bill is sent to the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution, what constitutional options are there in front of him?
- Are the Governor bound by the help and advice of the Council of Ministers while using his options in India?
- Can the Governor hear the steps taken by Article 200 in the court?
- Article 361, which keeps the Governor free from court action, bans judicial review of the decision taken by him under Article 200?
- When the time limit is not given in the constitution, can the time limit be fixed through judicial order? Can the method of exercise of those powers be determined?
- Under Article 201 of the Constitution, the President takes a decision using his discretion? Can his power be heard in court?
- When no time limit for the President’s decision has been fixed under Article 201 in the Constitution, can this be done through judicial order?
- Do the President need to take advice by sending reference under Article 143 to take a decision under Article 201?
- Under Article 200 and Article 201, the Governor and the President have to decide on the bills. Then he takes the form of law. Is it appropriate to consider the court constitutionally before the law is enacted by a bill?
- Article 142, which gives special power to the Supreme Court for justice, can be used for matters coming under the jurisdiction of the President and Governor?
- Can a law be made without the consent of the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution from the Assembly?
- When the issue is important in constitutional terms, should it not be sent to a bench of at least 5 judges under Article 145 (3) to a bench of the Supreme Court?
- Can the Supreme Court use Article 142 by going contrary to any law or constitutional provision?
- Article 131 provides for the intervention of the Supreme Court to resolve the disputes between the central and the state governments. Does this article prevent the Supreme Court from interfering in other cases?
These 5 judges will hear
Under the prescribed process, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court forms a constitution bench of five judges to consider such cases. The Constitution Bench expresses its opinion after considering all the questions deeply. Chief Justice BR Gavai has formed a bench of 5 judges under his chairmanship, the rest of its members are Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar.
How will the hearing be held?
The Constitution Bench has said that both sides will be given an opportunity to debate for 4-4 days. On the first day of the hearing i.e. on August 19, the sides, who are arguing with Kerala and Tamil Nadu without returning the idea, will speak about 1 hour. After this, the parties supporting the reference including the central government will start speaking. They have been given the day of 19, 20, 21 and 26 August.
After this, on August 28, 2, 3 and 9 September, the side opposing the reference will argue. The hearing will be completed on 10 September. That day the central government will get a chance to respond to the arguments of the opposing side, the Supreme Court appointed one nodal lawyer from both sides for the convenience in the hearing. These lawyers will help the court in keeping the hearing systematic by coordinating with the lawyers of their side.