President Murmu has listed a series of 14 questions for the Supreme Court to consider and grant an opinion under article 143 | Photo credit: PTI
President Drugupadi Murmu has sent a presidential reference to the Supreme Court for his opinion on whether the Court can use its inherent powers by virtue of article 143 to “impose” timelines and prescribe how to carry out the realization of the president and the governors while it comes to the state bills sent by assent.
The presidential reference also has the opinion of the Asprema Court on whether the deadlines can be imported in the President through judicial orders when the governors are reserved by the governors for the presidential assent.
The president’s reference said that there are contradictory judgments of the Supreme Court on whether the president’s assent under article 201 was justifiable or not.
The reference, dated May 13, has also sought opinion on contours A and the scope of article 142 of the Constitution.
Questions asked by the president
What are the constitutional options before a governor when a bill is presented by virtue of article 200 for the assent?
Is the governor forced by the aid and the advice presented by the Council of Ministers?
Is the exercise of constitutional discretion under article 200 justifiable?
Is article 361 of the Constitution (immunity given to the President and governors of legal actions while in office) an absolute bar for the judicial review in relation to the actions of a governor under article 200?
In the absence of any constitutionally prescribed time limit or exercise form or powers by a governor, can time limits be impressed and the form of exercise or powers is prescribed through judicial orders?
Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the President under article 201 (which deals with the bills reserved by a governor for consideration by the President) justiciable?
Can judicial orders impose deadlines and form of exercise of powers by the President under article 201?
Is the president requires advice from the Supreme Court when a governor reserves a bill for the president’s assent?
They are decisions of the governor and the president under articles 200 and 201, respectively, justifiable at a stage before the bill in question becomes a law. Is the courts allowed to underline the judicial award on the content of a bill, in some way, before it becomes law?
Can the constitutional powers of the President/Governors be replaced by a court order exercised by article 142?
Is a law made by the state legislature a current law without the assent of the governor?
Is it not mandatory for a Bank of the Supreme Court to examine whether a case involved substantial law issues regarding the interpretation of the Constitution and refers to the case of a bank of a minimum of five judges under article 145 (3)?
Is article 142 limited issues or procedural law or extends to the issuance of “contrary or inconsistent instructions with the existing or procedural provisions of the Constitution”?
Is there a bar in the Supreme Court when deciding between the center and the states that are not through an original lawsuit under article 131?
In a reference to the judgment of the governor of Tamil Nadu of the Apex Court, the presidential reference said that the “concept of consent considered of the president and the governor is Aline for the constitutional and fundamentally circumscribed scheme the power of the president and the governor.”
The judgment of the Court of Apex in the case of the governor of Tamil Nadu, which would be considered whether the president or the governor of Tamil Nadu that would settle for the bills if the president or the governor would not be actions within the prescribed time line of three months.
The presidential reference stressed that the States are appealed to approach the Apex court under article 32, and not article 131, to raise issues “that by their very nature are federal issues that involve the interpretation of the Constitution.”
President Murmu has listed a series of 14 questions for the Supreme Court to consider and grant an opinion under article 143.
Published – May 15, 2025 09:50 amtt