&w=3840&q=100)
Can SC set deadlines for President? Murmu seeks top court's opinion on 14 questions
President Droupadi Murmu has asked a barrage of questions to the Supreme Court as she responded to its last month's landmark judgement that set a three-month limit for the head of the state to act on state bills.
President Murmu asked the top court how it could pass such a judgment when the Indian Constitution has no stipulations on the time taken by the president to veto or pocket veto bills.
She has invoked Article 143 of the Constitution to seek the Supreme Court's opinion on a legal issue or matter of public importance, exercising the presidential power to consult the court in such cases.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
What did the court say?
The apex court passed a judgment in April on the State of Tamil Nadu v The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Anr and held that the Governors cannot sit over bills passed by the state legislature indefinitely.
A bench consisting of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan laid down the provisions of Articles 200 and 201 of the Indian Constitution as it passed the judgment.
The bench stated that the phrase 'as soon as possible' in Article 200 conveys a sense of urgency and does not permit the governor to 'sit on the bills and exercise pocket veto over them.'
What has Prez Murmu asked?
Here are all the questions posed by President Murmu:
What are the constitutional options before a governor when a Bill is presented to him under Article 200?
Is the governor bound by the aid and advice tendered by the council of ministers while exercising all the options available to him when a Bill is presented before him?
Is the constitutional discretion by the guv under Art 200 justiciable?
Is Article 361 an absolute bar to judicial review in relation to actions of a guv under Article 200?
In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit, and the manner of exercise of powers by the governor, can timeline be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the purpose of exercise of all powers under Article 200 by the governor?
Is exercise of constitutional discretion by President under Article 201 justiciable?
In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed timeline and the manner of exercise of powers by the President, can timelines be imposed and manner of exercise prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of discretion by the President under Article 201?
In the light of the constitutional scheme governing powers of the President, is the President required to seek advice of SC by way of a reference under Article 143 and take SC's opinion when the governor reserves a Bill for President's assent or otherwise?
Are decisions of the guv and President under Articles 200 and 201, respectively, justiciable at a stage anterior into the law coming into force? Is it permissible for courts to undertake judicial adjudication over contents of a Bill, in any manner, before it becomes law?
Can the exercise of constitutional powers and orders of/by President/governor be substituted in any manner under Article 142?
Is the law made by the state legislature a law in force without the assent of the governor?
In view of Article 145(3) is it not mandatory for any bench of SC to first decide whether the question involved in the proceedings before it is of such nature which involves substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of Constitution and to refer it to it a bench of minimum five judges?
Do the powers of SC under Article 142 limited to matters of procedural law or Article 142 extend to issuing directions/passing orders contrary to or inconsistent with the existing substantive or procedural provisions of the Constitution or law in force?
Does Constitution bar any other jurisdiction of SC to resolve disputes between Union government and state governments except by way of a suit under Article 131?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
27 minutes ago
- NDTV
"Draconian Act": Congress Slams Centre Over Constitution Amendment Bill
New Delhi: Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury on Wednesday criticised the 130th Constitution Amendment Bill that sought to allow the removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and ministers if they were held on serious criminal charges. The Congress leader accused the ruling BJP of using its majority in Parliament to push through the bill with the intention of targeting the opposition. He called the move "draconian" and politically motivated. The 130th Constitution Amendment Bill seeks to remove the Prime Minister or Chief Ministers who are facing allegations of corruption or serious offences and have been detained for 30 consecutive days. Speaking to ANI, the Congress leader called the bill a political weapon and said, "The intention of the ruling side to pass this bill using its majority is not right. This will be used as a tool to target the opposition. This is a draconian act." He further questioned the timing of the bill, linking it to ongoing debates over the allegation on the Election Commission of 'vote theft'. "At a time when questions are rising against the Election Commission, there is panic in the ruling party, and this issue has now been raised to divert attention from it?" Adhir Ranjan told ANI. Earlier in the day, slamming the BJP government over the introduction of the 130th Constitution Amendment Bill in Lok Sabha, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin said that legislation, if passed, will allow the ruling party at the Centre to register false cases against Chief Ministers of the opposition parties and it will shake the democratic foundations of the country. In a post on X, Mr Stalin said that the BJP Government has decided to "defile" the Constitution."The 130th Constitutional Amendment is not reform -- this is a Black Day and this is a Black Bill. 30-day arrest = Removal of an elected CM. No trial, no conviction -- just BJP's DIKTAT. This is how DICTATORSHIPS begin: Steal votes, Silence rivals and Crush States," wrote Mr Stalin while condemning the bill. The Tamil Nadu CM pointed out that the introduction of the said bill is the BJP's government diversion tactic to bring the bill at a time when it is facing allegations over "vote theft". "After the expose of #VoteTheft, the very mandate on which the Union BJP Government was formed is in serious question. Its legitimacy is doubtful. Having stolen the mandate of the people through fraud, the BJP is now desperate to distract public attention from this expose. To do that, they have brought in the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill," he said. Expressing faith in the judiciary, CM Stalin said that the Constitution Amendment bill will be struck down by the courts. Union Home Minister Amit Shah introduced the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, to further amend the Constitution of India and the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025, apart from the bill to amend the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019. He also proposed sending the bllls to a joint committee of Parliament.
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Police must be true to Constitution: Meeran Borwankar
1 2 Pune: Former Pune police commissioner Meeran Borwankar on Wednesday said political interference is hampering the efficiency of the police, leading officers away from the truth. She said officers must remain committed to the Constitution, keeping religion away from their duty. She said, "The sole loyalty should be to the Constitution in the police force and all other departments. One may read The Bible, Bhagvad Gita, Guru Granth Sahib or Quran — and I respect all those who do — but such practices should be done at home and not in office. It will be extremely dangerous the day khaki turns saffron, green or white." Speaking at a book launch held to mark slain rationalist Narendra Dabholkar's twelfth death anniversary, the retired IPS officer gave examples of the 2008 Malegaon blast, 2006 Mumbai train blast and the murder investigation of Dabholkar. She said political interference in such sensitive cases was troubling. You Can Also Check: Pune AQI | Weather in Pune | Bank Holidays in Pune | Public Holidays in Pune | Gold Rates Today in Pune | Silver Rates Today in Pune "In his article, retired IPS officer Julio Ribeiro wrote that Hemant Karkare (then chief of state ATS) told him just a day or two before his death about the pressure he was facing from a Delhi-based leader while investigating the Malegaon blast case," she said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo "Former public prosecutor for the ATS in the said case, Rohini Salian, questioned the recent verdict and asked — 'Where has all the evidence gone?'" she added. Borwankar said even the judge had raised concerns over the probe in the Dabholkar case and said the CBI had failed to identify the real conspirators and "it was either a failure, deliberate (negligence) or the result of influence from some powerful individuals." "We could not give justice to 190 victims of the Mumbai train blast, the victims of the Malegaon blast and Dabholkar," she said, highlighting the delay of cases in the court. "It takes years for a final verdict and cases which involve activist Gauri Lankesh, social activist comrade Govind Pansare and scholar MM Kalburgi have remained pending for years now," she added. Borwankar said she had received a threat mail for attending the event. "Before coming to this programme, I wrote an article to which I received reactions from people through about 20 mails and some 10 WhatsApp messages. In one mail, I was threatened for attending this book launch." The former IPS officer recalled an incident where she experienced political pressure during her tenure as the Pune CP. "During electronic surveillance, we caught Shiv Sena member Neelam Gorhe and UBT MLA (then with undivided Sena) Milind Narvekar conspiring to create violence in Pune. Despite reluctance from local police officers, I told my joint CP to ensure that a case was registered. I appointed my personal staff to investigate the matter," she said, adding her team thoroughly probed the case and filed a chargesheet in court. "However, later the govt withdrew the case. One can imagine how powerful the politicians are and people question the police," she added. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Amendment new strategy by neo fascist politics: CM
T'puram: Chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan said that Sangh Parivar was employing a new strategy to target non-BJP state govts and the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025– introduced in Lok Sabha on Wednesday – can only be seen as part of the central govt's political decision. "This is a continuation of the vendetta politics using central investigative agencies. There was a longstanding attempt to destabilize state govts by weaponizing central agencies. As part of that, chief ministers and ministers who hold constitutional responsibilities in the country were imprisoned for extended periods. The frustration over their refusal to resign is what prompted the hasty introduction of this amendment," he said. The attempt is to trap individuals in fake cases, imprison them and disqualify them—this is the new experiment of neo-fascist politics, said Vijayan. "BJP members must explain under what constitutional morality those arrested in corruption cases become sanctified upon joining their party. The move to destabilize state govts is a continuation of efforts to undermine the constitutional rights of states and establish that governors have veto power over legislatures," he said. Vijayan said strong protest should arise from all democratic believers against the anti-democratic moves of Sangh Parivar targeting political opponents. There must be a united move against this amendment, which paves the way for political misuse, he added. Meanwhile, opposition leader VD Satheesan said the proposed amendment in the Constitution Bill, goes against the basic principles of Indian laws and the opposition will strongly protest against this move. Under existing laws, a person is guilty of an offence only when a court of law convicts him or her. "Piloting this bill itself is against natural justice. It is against the principles of law, basic principles of law, because when a person is convicted by a court after a long procedure of trial, then only he/she will be a convicted person; till then, there is a feeling that he/she is an innocent person," said Satheesan. The opposition leader said with this, any central govt can use central agencies to register cases against any ministers of the state govts that are ruled by opposition parties. This can be misused for political gains. This is against the basic principles of law and against natural justice, he said. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
