President Murmu Asks 14 Questions to Supreme Court on Timelines for Clearing Bills

 At a time when athe gap between the judiciary and the executive is widening, Justice BR Gavai, who was sworn in as the country's top ranking judicial officer on Wednesday, will face several pressing questions to begin his tenure.

From setting a timeline for the Governer and President's assent to bills to the use of the Supreme Court's Extraordinary Powers under Article 142 to deliver complete justice. 

Key Issues

Governors not acting eighter withholding, Granting or reserving bills for months or even years.

States claiming it vioalates federalism and democracy, where elected goverments are hindered by unelected constitutional heads.

President Murmu's reference to SC: Article 143(1)

Article 143(1) allows the President to seek the SC"s advisory openion on questions of law or fact of public importance.

Questions

1. Is the President's/ Governer's discretion under Articles 200/201 subject to judicial scrutiny?

2. Can courts prescribe deadlines in absence of explicit timrlines  in consitution?

3. Can SC use Article 142 to issue procedural mandates for constitutional authorities?

4. Is deemed assent valid when no action is taken within time?

5. Is Presidential reference mandatory when a Governer reserve a bill?

6. Can courts interven before a bill becomes law?

7. Should states appoach SC under Article 131 (inter-government disputes) instead of 32(fundamental rights)?

8. Does SC ruling violate the costitutional balance of power?

9. Do SC deadlines weaken state powers?

10. Do recent ruling contradict past SC judgements?

11. Did Frames envision judicial regulation of executive discretion?

12. Does the ruling affect the autonomy of state legislatures?

13. Who holds the executive accountable courts or Parliament?

14. Can such directions lead to inter-institutional clashes?

First Presidental Reference on this Issue

1. A rare and serious use of Article 143.

2. Previously used in Berubari Case, Rama janambhoomi and Babri Masjid dispute and Uniform Civil code debate.

What Next

1. 5 or 7 judge bench of the Supreme Court will examine these questions. 

2. Its advisory opinion is not binding, but carries persuasive value and shapes policy.

Possible Outcomes

1. SC could affirm its earlier stance with modifications.

2. SC might clarify limits of timelines or strike down deemed assent.

3. SC could reassert seperation of powers, limiting its own intervention.

Related Topic-

After Operation Sindoor, countries are queuing up to buy India's Fire-and-Forget Missile BrahMos

First time, Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar talks to Afganistan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi

Bad News for India : China, pakistan and Afghanistan Agree to Expand CPEC

EXPOSED: Who is Jyoti Malhotra? Travel Youtuber Arrested for Spying  for Pakistan

NOTE-  This is not any recommendation or advice to any Stock or Fund please consult your financial adviser before any investment. 

But my best thought 'DON'T DELAY INVEST TODAY'.

FOR OPEN DEMAT ACCOUNT CLICK ON THE LINK-

ZERODHA- https://zerodha.com/open-account?c=PF6713 

ANGEL ONE - https://angel-one.onelink.me/Wjgr/e3acgmou

GROWW- https://app.groww.in/v3cO/4hlp4x6e 

PLEASE FOLLOW, COMMENT AND SHARE TO OTHERS IF I ADD ANY VALUE.