News Brief
'How Can A Timeline Be Prescribed for The President And Governor?': Murmu Invokes Article 143, Seeks Supreme Court's Opinion
President Droupadi Murmu.
President Droupadi Murmu has formally referred a set of constitutional questions to the Supreme Court under Article 143, seeking the apex court's opinion on whether the judiciary can mandate timelines for Governors and the President to act on state legislation, India Today reported.
The reference comes in the wake of a recent Supreme Court judgment in the Tamil Nadu Governor case, where a two-judge bench had held that constitutional heads must not indefinitely delay assent to bills passed by state legislatures.
The judgment had triggered sharp responses from the executive, with Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar questioning the Supreme Court's use of its extraordinary powers under Article 142 to set a deadline for both the President and the Governor, and clearing 10 bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly without the Executive's nod, calling it a case of "judicial overreach."
The constitutional questions were referred to the Supreme Court by President Murmu on Tuesday (13 May), a day before new Chief Justice of India Gavai took oath, India Today reported.
According to the India Today report, Among the 14 questions posed by the President are:
Are states misusing the "plenary power" of the Supreme Court against Center?
How can a timeline be prescribed for the President and Governor?
How are the decisions of the Governor under article 200 justiciable?
The newly sworn-in Chief Justice of India, Justice B R Gavai, will now reportedly be required to set up a Constitution bench, comprising five or more judges, to provide an opinion to the 14 questions posed by the President.
