CJI Gavai to decide presidential reference on timelines for bill assent
New Delhi, May 15 (UNI) One of the first constitutional challenges awaiting the newly sworn-in Chief Justice of India Justice DY Gavai is the presidential reference under Article 143(1) sent by President Droupadi Murmu.
The reference seeks the Supreme Court's authoritative opinion on whether it can prescribe time-bound deadlines for the President and Governors to grant or withhold assent to bills passed by state legislatures.
The matter gains significance in the wake of increasing tensions between state governments and Raj Bhavans over prolonged delays in clearing legislative proposals.
The Supreme Court's intervention is now being sought to determine whether such delays can be curtailed through judicially imposed timelines particularly using the court's inherent powers under Article 142.
The reference is also seen as a response from the executive to a recent verdict delivered by a two-judge bench led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala, which suggested timelines for gubernatorial decisions.
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar had voiced sharp criticism against judicial attempts to fix timelines for constitutional authorities, setting the stage for this high-stakes legal confrontation.
The Supreme Court is now constitutionally obligated to deliberate on 14 questions raised by the President.
These include the permissible scope of judicial oversight over the discretionary powers of the President and Governors, especially under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution, and whether Article 142 allows the Court to direct constitutional functionaries on timelines.
CJI Gavai is expected to constitute a Constitution bench comprising at least five judges to examine the matter and deliver an advisory opinion which, while not binding, carries significant constitutional weight.
The Supreme Court is poised to navigate uncharted territory, where judicial interpretation may reshape the delicate balance of federalism and executive discretion in India's democratic framework.
UNI SNG PRS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
33 minutes ago
- United News of India
President Putin weighs in on Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Iran wars, clarifies Moscow's stance
Moscow, June 21 (UNI) Weighing in on the Russia-Ukraine war, and the ongoing Israel-Iran war, Russian President Vladmir Putin highlighted their key aspects, and clarified Moscow's stance on both of them, in an interview with Sky News Arabia. Speaking on the Ukraine war, Putin claimed that external powers are actively blocking a peaceful resolution, accusing them of using Ukraine as a proxy to serve their own strategic goals. 'Ukraine deserves a better fate than to be a tool in the hands of external parties working against Russia,' he said, calling for a settlement that would ensure Ukraine's neutrality and end its pursuit of alliances, particularly military blocs. He insisted that Ukraine must renounce any ambitions related to nuclear weapons, describing it as a critical step toward regional stability. Putin also maintained that any lasting agreement must include recognition of the referendums held in four regions now claimed by Russia, warning that dismissing these results could reignite full-scale conflict. He pointed to the 2022 Istanbul talks as a missed opportunity, suggesting both sides had come close to a deal before it was derailed. Ukraine's current leadership, he said, should act in the country's own national interest rather than following the agenda of outside actors. Resolving outstanding humanitarian issues, he added, must be a key part of any future settlement. On the intensifying standoff between Israel and Iran, Putin reaffirmed Moscow's support for Tehran's right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, adding that Russia stands ready to provide technical support. While acknowledging that differences remain, particularly over Iran's nuclear programme, he said there is still space for agreement if both sides show flexibility. He stressed that the International Atomic Energy Agency had found no evidence that Iran possesses or is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Putin reiterated Russia's long-standing opposition to the spread of weapons of mass destruction and welcomed Iran's adoption of a resolution banning the use of nuclear arms, calling it a move worthy of serious international recognition. He added that Moscow had repeatedly assured Israeli leaders that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons, urging open dialogue to ease tensions and strengthen regional security. UNI ANV RN
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Sharing video footage of polling stations breaches voters' privacy: EC officials
Amid demands to make public webcasting footage of polling stations, Election Commission officials on Saturday said such a move is violative of privacy and security concerns of voters. They said while such demand suits their narrative in making it sound quite genuine and in the interest of voters and safeguarding the democratic process, it is, in fact, aimed at achieving exactly the "opposite objective". Officials claimed that what is veiled as a very logical demand is actually "entirely contrary" to the privacy and security concerns of voters, the legal position laid down in the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and 1951 and the directions of the Supreme Court . by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Cardiologists Recommend: Eat 1 Teaspoon Tonight – Wake Up With a Flatter Stomach Hollywood News | USA Click Here Undo Sharing the footage, which would enable easy identification of the electors by any group or an individual, would leave both the elector who has voted as well the elector who has not voted vulnerable to pressure, discrimination and intimidation by anti-social elements, they asserted. Creating an instance, they said if a particular political party gets the lesser number of votes in a particular booth, it would easily be able to identify, through the CCTV footage, which elector has voted and which elector has not, and, thereafter, may harass or intimidate them. Live Events To be sure, the Election Commission retains the CCTV footage, which is purely an internal management tool and not a mandatory requirement, for a period of 45 days which aligns with the period laid down for filing an election petition. Since no election can be challenged beyond 45 days of the declaration of the result, retaining the footage beyond this period makes it susceptible to misuse of the content by non-contestants for spreading misinformation and malicious narratives, the officials underlined. They noted that in case an election petition is filed within 45 days, the CCTV footage is not destroyed and also made available to the competent court when asked for. Maintaining privacy and secrecy of the elector is non-negotiable for the EC and it has never compromised on this essential tenet laid down in the law as well upheld by the Supreme Court, the functionaries said. Fearing the use of its electronic data to create "malicious narratives", the Election Commission has instructed its state poll officers to destroy CCTV cameras, webcasting and video footage of the election process after 45 days, if the verdict is not challenged in courts within that period. The remarks come in the backdrop of a demand by the Congress and other opposition parties to release post-5 pm CCTV footage from polling booths in the 2024 Maharashtra assembly elections . In December last year, the government tweaked an election rule to prevent public inspection of certain electronic documents such as CCTV cameras and webcasting footage as well as video recordings of candidates to prevent their misuse. Based on the recommendation of the EC, the Union law ministry amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, to restrict the type of papers or documents open to public inspection. In a letter to state chief electoral officers on May 30, the EC said it has issued instructions for recording various stages of the election process through multiple recording devices -- photography, videography, CCTV and webcasting during the election process. While electoral laws do not mandate such recordings, the Commission uses them as an internal management tool during various stages of the electoral process. "However, the recent misuse of this content by non-contestants for spreading misinformation and malicious narratives on social media by selective and out-of-context use of such content, which will not lead to any legal outcome, has prompted a review," it said.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Sharing video of polling station violation of voter privacy: EC officials
Amid demands to make public webcasting footage of polling stations, Election Commission officials on Saturday said such a move is violative of privacy and security concerns of voters. They said while such demand suits their narrative in making it sound quite genuine and in the interest of voters and safeguarding the democratic process, it is, in fact, aimed at achieving exactly the "opposite objective". Officials claimed that what is veiled as a very logical demand is actually "entirely contrary" to the privacy and security concerns of voters, the legal position laid down in the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and 1951 and the directions of the Supreme Court. Sharing the footage, which would enable easy identification of the electors by any group or an individual, would leave both the elector who has voted as well the elector who has not voted vulnerable to pressure, discrimination and intimidation by anti-social elements, they asserted. Creating an instance, they said if a particular political party gets the lesser number of votes in a particular booth, it would easily be able to identify, through the CCTV footage, which elector has voted and which elector has not, and, thereafter, may harass or intimidate them. To be sure, the Election Commission retains the CCTV footage, which is purely an internal management tool and not a mandatory requirement, for a period of 45 days which aligns with the period laid down for filing an election petition. Since no election can be challenged beyond 45 days of the declaration of the result, retaining the footage beyond this period makes it susceptible to misuse of the content by non-contestants for spreading misinformation and malicious narratives, the officials underlined. They noted that in case an election petition is filed within 45 days, the CCTV footage is not destroyed and also made available to the competent court when asked for. Maintaining privacy and secrecy of the elector is non-negotiable for the EC and it has never compromised on this essential tenet laid down in the law as well upheld by the Supreme Court, the functionaries said. Fearing the use of its electronic data to create "malicious narratives", the Election Commission has instructed its state poll officers to destroy CCTV cameras, webcasting and video footage of the election process after 45 days, if the verdict is not challenged in courts within that period. The remarks come in the backdrop of a demand by the Congress and other opposition parties to release post-5 pm CCTV footage from polling booths in the 2024 Maharashtra assembly elections. In December last year, the government tweaked an election rule to prevent public inspection of certain electronic documents such as CCTV cameras and webcasting footage as well as video recordings of candidates to prevent their misuse. Based on the recommendation of the EC, the Union law ministry amended Rule 93 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, to restrict the type of papers or documents open to public inspection. In a letter to state chief electoral officers on May 30, the EC said it has issued instructions for recording various stages of the election process through multiple recording devices -- photography, videography, CCTV and webcasting during the election process. While electoral laws do not mandate such recordings, the Commission uses them as an internal management tool during various stages of the electoral process. "However, the recent misuse of this content by non-contestants for spreading misinformation and malicious narratives on social media by selective and out-of-context use of such content, which will not lead to any legal outcome, has prompted a review," it said.
