
'You go to Parliament': Supreme Court rejects plea seeking Article 142 powers for high courts
Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass 'any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it' within the country.
ALSO READ | 'We are alleged to be encroaching upon parliamentary, executive functions': Supreme Court
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan wondered how the court could allow such a petition. 'How can we grant such prayer? It requires an amendment to the Constitution. You go to Parliament. Prayer made in this petition is completely misconceived. Power conferred under Article 142 of the Constitution is only on this court and not the high courts. Therefore, we cannot allow high court to exercise power of this court under Article 142,' the bench said.
The top court last exercised its power under Article 142 in the case brought by the Tamil Nadu government against state governor RN Ravi for his inordinate delay in granting assent to 10 bills passed by the state legislative assembly.
In its judgement, the apex court came down heavily on the governor for his 'unconstitutional' actions and held that all state bills were deemed to have granted assent. All 10 bills were notified by the ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu as laws under the government gazette. The case marked an historic development in India's federal history where state bills became laws without the governor's assent.
ALSO READ | Timelines set on bills extend to President's Office: Supreme Court in TN govt vs Governor case
The judgment by a bench of justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan also set clear timelines for the governor to decide on granting or withholding assent to bills passed by the state legislative assembly or referring them to the president. The specific timelines apply not just to governors but also to the President to act on state legislation - a first in India's constitutional history.
The development seemed to have set off a face-off between the top court and the executive, with Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankar slamming the use of Article 142 as a 'nuclear missile'. The Rajya Sabha chairman also criticised the court for acting as a 'super parliament.'
Opposition leaders launched sharp criticism in response to Dhankhar. Several parties, including the Congress, Trinamool Congress (TMC), the DMK, and prominent legal voices, accused the Vice President of undermining the judiciary and 'bordering on contempt.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
9 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Do not use name of living personalities in govt ads: Madras HC
Bengaluru The Madras high court has said that political parties cannot use names or images of any living personality, including chief ministers and ideological leaders, as well as party insignia or symbols, in government advertisements for welfare schemes. Do not use name of living personalities in govt ads: Madras HC A bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan barred the inclusion of 'the name of any living personality, photographs of former chief ministers or ideological leaders,' and 'party symbols, emblems, or flags of political parties,' including those of the ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu, in advertisements for government welfare schemes. The bench passed the order on July 31 while hearing a petition filed by AIADMK Member of Parliament C Ve Shanmugam, who had sought an injunction against the DMK government's use of Chief Minister MK Stalin's name and image, as well as the images of other DMK leaders, in the State's public grievance redressal scheme 'Mudhalvarin Mugavari.' Senior counsel Vijay Narayan, who appeared for Shanmugam, told the court that using the chief minister's name and party images in a state-funded scheme violated Supreme Court directives and the Government Advertisement (Content Regulation) Guidelines, 2014. The court said that the use of such references in state-sponsored promotions did 'prima facie' violate multiple apex court rulings, including the latter's clarification issued in 2016 on the review petition filed in the case of State of Karnataka vs Common Cause. In such order, the Supreme Court had clarified that while the photograph of an incumbent chief minister may be used in official government advertisements, photographs of ideological leaders or former chief ministers will prima facie violate its earlier directives aimed at curbing political misuse of public funds, the high court said. 'It would not be permissible to mention the name of the living political personality in the nomenclature of the government scheme. Moreover, using the name of any ruling political party, its insignia/logo/emblem/flag also appears to be prima facie against the directives of the Supreme Court and the Election Commission of India,' the high court said. It said that keeping in mind the above, it was passing an order 'to the effect that while launching and operating government welfare schemes through various advertisements, the name of any living personality, photograph of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or party insignia/emblem/flag of respondent No.4 (DMK) shall not be included.' Opposing the plea, the state's counsel, Advocate General P S Raman, had argued that the petition relied on unauthenticated materials such as unofficial printouts, which did not represent official government publications. Raman assured the court that the government had not used the photographs of any political leaders or party symbols in its promotional materials and requested time to file a detailed affidavit along with authentic records. Senior advocate P Wilson, who was representing the DMK, told the court the petition was politically motivated. Wilson pointed out that the petitioner belonged to the opposition and alleged that the plea was an attempt to 'malign' the ruling party's image 'under the guise of public interest.' While recording that the State denied the petitioner's claims, the court emphasised the importance of adhering to the legal framework governing government publicity. The Bench said it was 'inclined to pass an interim order' given the petitioner's apprehension that more such schemes were in the pipeline. However, the court clarified that its present order did not interfere with the actual launch or implementation of any welfare scheme. 'We have not passed any order against launching, implementation or operation of welfare schemes of the government,' the bench said. The court also made it clear that the pendency of the petition will not restrain the Election Commission of India or other competent authorities from taking action on the basis of the petitioner's complaint. The court is likely to hear the matter further on August 13.


Hans India
39 minutes ago
- Hans India
Congress sleepwalks toward irrelevance and a 2029 defeat
The Congress party and it's I.N.D.I.A bloc allies have once again exposed their deep-rooted bias and misplaced priorities by mocking names like Operation Mahadev and Operation Sindoor. In their desperation to attack the government, they've stooped to questioning military operations, insulting our armed forces, and echoing hostile foreign voices like Donald Trump. From denying Pakistan's role in terror attacks to staying silent on the Malegaon verdict, the opposition's selective outrage and appeasement politics have crossed all limits. They refuse to show empathy to victims, seek justice for the falsely accused, or respect national sentiment which exposes their dangerous hypocrisy and reminds them that secularism doesn't mean shaming Hindu symbols or compromising India's integrity. They say you can wake up a sleeping person, but you cannot wake someone who is pretending to be asleep. This aptly describes the Congress party and the disjointed I.N.D.I.A bloc today. Their posturing in Parliament during the debate on Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev proves one thing: if they continue down this path, they are inching towards a political wipeout by 2029. Let me begin with a small anecdote. In Tamil Nadu, sworn opponents DMK and AIADMK, despite their ideological battles, once presented a united front before Singapore authorities regarding a delayed project. The Singapore officials were stunned to see both parties in the same room. The Tamil leaders simply replied, 'Our fight is only within the state. When it comes to protecting Tamil Nadu's interests, we are one.' In stark contrast, look at Andhra Pradesh's YSRCP, a Congress offshoot led by former chief minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy. They shamelessly wrote to Singapore, urging them to withhold investments in Andhra Pradesh, citing a potential change in government at a time when the incumbent Chief Minister and the official delegation were in talks to attract investments to the state. And in Delhi, the Congress and allies act in a similar fashion — prioritising petty politics over national interest. During the parliamentary discussion on the military operations that neutralised terrorists and upheld national honour, Congress and its allies insulted the armed forces by questioning the names of the operations — Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev — calling them communal and divisive. Seriously? They don't ask how our armed forces entered deep into Pakistani territory, destroyed their airbase and effectively called Pakistan's nuclear bluff and how the homemade missiles caught the attention of the world and how our forces neutralised drones. Instead, they obsess over how many aircraft India may have lost and why the operation was named 'Mahadev,' even going so far as to claim—without a shred of evidence—that five jets were downed. What a distorted sense of priorities. Some argue that terrorists don't care about religion when they kill. But how can they dismiss the words of a young widow whose husband was brutally murdered before her eyes—after the terrorists explicitly asked about their religion? Former Union Home Minister P Chidambaram even shamelessly asked, 'Where is the proof that they came from Pakistan? They could be home-grown terrorists.' Does he want to be Pakistan's defence lawyer? Is there no empathy left in the Congress leadership for the families of those who died in the Pahalgam attack? The grieving families found some solace on coming to know that the killers were neutralised. But the opposition? They were busy crafting conspiracy theories and playing communal politics. Their hatred for the current government has become so blind that they've started echoing the words of US President Donald Trump over the statements made by India's own ministers in Parliament. Trump falsely claimed on multiple occasions that he brokered peace between India and Pakistan. The opposition clowns couldn't even decide how many times Trump said it — some said 25, Rahul said 29. Maybe they should learn basic arithmetic before jumping into geopolitics. They should have also spoken about Trump's theatrics of sharing an AI-generated video of the arrest of former president of US Barack Obama, something which is not expected from people in such high positions. When Trump called India's economy 'dead,' Rahul Gandhi — ever eager to join anyone who criticises the country just to attack Prime Minister Narendra Modi — promptly echoed the statement. But Trump's comment wasn't surprising, considering that the U.S. is now courting Pakistan to explore so-called 'massive oil reserves.' This has sparked scepticism: Does Pakistan really have oil reserves significant enough to attract major American interest? Official Pakistani data tells a different story. In 2019, Pakistan produced only 89,030 barrels of crude oil per day. By 2025, this figure is projected to fall further to 64,262 barrels per day — hardly a sign of a booming oil economy. Meanwhile, what truly seems to irk the U.S. — and by extension, Trump — is that India has become the world's fourth-largest economy, trailing only the US, China and Germany. Even more disruptive was India's launch of the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) — a revolutionary digital platform that brought cashless convenience to over one billion people, many of whom never had access to traditional banking systems. While much of the developed world remains tethered to credit cards and slow, fee-laden payment models, UPI leapfrogged ahead — empowering everyone from small-time vendors to global entrepreneurs. India's digital economy is flourishing. Per capita income has doubled in the last 11 years, and the country is now a global leader in GDP growth. In such a scenario, calling the Indian economy 'dead' is not just false — it's absurd. When your country is unfairly criticised, a patriot stands up in its defence. But not Rahul Gandhi — for him, attacking Modi takes precedence over defending India. Rahul, as the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, demanded 'proof' of Operation Sindoor's success. But he must now explain a far more serious issue: Who was responsible for the 2008 Malegaon blasts? He must stop ducking the issue and apologise for maligning individuals like Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit and Major Ramesh Upadhyay, who lost 17 crucial years of their lives to false accusations. The courts have since dismissed the so-called 'saffron terror' narrative. If not them, then who was behind the blasts? Will Congress take responsibility? Will they apologise or offer restitution? Unlikely. Instead, Rahul Gandhi continues to deflect with lines like, 'Don't divert the issue. The real issue is India's economy is dead.' But that's the real tragedy — a politics devoid of accountability, humility, or truth. Sonia Gandhi, who chaired the UPA at the time, and Rahul Gandhi must break their silence. Justice delayed was grave enough — justice denied would be unforgivable. And now, the same bunch dares to call Operation Mahadev communal! Do they not know that naming military operations is the prerogative of the armed forces, often based on geography, symbolism, or historical references? Under Congress rule, there were operations like: Operation Vijay; Operation Meghdoot; Operation Shivalik and Operation Devi Shakti. Were these names not Hindu references? Were those operations communal? Of course not. Each Indian army regiment has its own battle cry: Gorkha Rifles: 'Jai Maa Kali, Ayo Gorkhali!' Rajputana Rifles: 'Raja Ram Chandra Ki Jai!' Kumaon Regiment: 'Kalika Mata Ki Jai!' Sikh Regiment: 'Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal!' These are not signs of communalism — they are signs of regimental spirit, heritage, and pride. The Congress and its allies need to understand that secularism does not mean mocking Hinduism at every opportunity. It means equal respect for all religions. But unfortunately, they see religious insult only in Hindu expressions, while bending over backwards to appease others. Their attempts to peddle fear and division have backfired. Even the minorities they claim to champion see through this farce now. The Congress no longer understands the pulse of the people — their outdated politics of appeasement, victimhood, and communal blame-game have rendered them irrelevant in modern India. It's high time the Congress stops pretending to be asleep — or else, they will sleepwalk into another electoral disaster in 2029. (The author is former Chief Editor of The Hans India)


Hans India
39 minutes ago
- Hans India
MyVoice: Views of our readers 2nd Aug 2025
MLAs defections: SC directions praiseworthy The Supreme Court ordering the speaker of the Telangana Legislative Assembly to take decision on the ten MLAs who are facing charges of defection within three months is praiseworthy. The speaker has been taking time longer than it should be to decide the matter, subverting the spirit of the anti-defection law. Though there is no mention of time limit in rule books for speakers to take a call on defections, the inordinate delay makes a mockery of well laid down democratic norms. It's good that the apex court has set the record straight and hopefully the speaker will act per the court ruling. Dr DVG Sankara Rao, Vizianagaram Put a permanent stop to defections The speakers of Parliament and that of the State legislative bodies have often been found undermining democratic values when it comes to defections by elected people's representatives. Indian democracy has always been subverted by opportunistic politicians, who derive tacit support from speakers, who misuse their constitutional authority in taking decisions vis-à-vis the detectors. It is now for the Parliament to 'listen' to the sentiments expressed by the Supreme Court in this regard and set the record straight. But none of the political parties would want to close doors to their pursuit of power, by hook or crook. And for them 'defection' is the biggest weapon even if it means subverting democracy! The Supreme Court can't order the speakers to take decisions within a stipulated time frame. It is for the Parliament to reconcile and bring in legislation to permanently settle the issue, so that the menace of defections is stopped once and for all. Govardhana Myneedu, Vijayawada Historic ruling by the Supreme Court SC giving the Telangana Legislative Assembly speaker three months to decide on the defection of 10 BRS employees to Congress is a historical decision. However, it raises a crucial question: why not work out a robust constitutional provision to prevent defections altogether? In instances where MLAs switch loyalties after winning elections, a clear provision could mandate resignation from the incumbent party before joining another. This would uphold democratic values and prevent the erosion of public trust. Notably, many political leaders, including K Chandrasekhar Rao, K T Rama Rao, and N Chandrababu Naidu have encouraged such defections, undermining the integrity of the electoral process. In this context, the Supreme Court's role becomes pivotal in protecting democratic principles and ensuring accountability. A strong constitutional provision would help prevent future incidents and restore faith in the system. The judiciary's proactive stance is crucial in upholding the nation's democratic fabric. Dr. Venkat Yadav Avula, MASS Hyderabad Calling Trump's tariff bluff In an increasingly fractious world order, the U.S. fired another salvo in its trade war targeting India with a hefty tariff on exports effective from August 1, besides additional penalties for buying Russian oil and arms. This only goes to show that US President Donald Trump has been a vitriolic opportunity offender, who cannot be fully relied upon. However, India's response to Trump's provocations has been measured and non-combative by saying that India will protect the interests of its farmers and MSMEs. Apparently, Trump must understand that like earlier, India is not a soft state now with deep economic resilience, vast domestic absorption capacity, therefore, there can be no giving in to his pressure tactics. Despite Trump describing closeness of India and Russia as 'dead economies', it is imperative that India refrain from reacting in a knee-jerk manner by keeping calm while trying to explore fast-track deals with the EU and other destinations more or less on the deals signed with the UK. India must adopt a cautious approach while at the same time remaining firm in its dealings that sends a strong message to Trump to agree to even terms in trade policy because his likes and dislikes of BRICS and global South is not going to help America in any manner in the long term both in trade and foreign policy matters with India. K R Srinivasan, Secunderabad-3