Explaining Group in a recent ruling of the Supreme Court that prescribes a schedule for the president to decide on the bills, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday (April 17, 2025) said that India had not negotiated for the functions of democracy legislate, carry out a formation plate. | Photo credit: PTI
Exputing Group on a recent ruling from the Supreme Court that prescribes a timeline for the President to decide on the bills, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday (April 17, 2025) said that India had not negotiated for the functions of democracy and where he judges the judges, the performance of the performance.
Last week, the Supreme Court had first prescribed that the president should decide on the bills reserved for his consultation by the governor within three months from the date that said reference is recovered.
“There is a directive for the president for a recent trial. Where do we go? What is happening in the country? We have to be extremely sensitive. It is not that any presentation of a review or not. We never negotiate for a while of flight. If not, it becomes law,” Mr. Dhankhar said here.
Addressing a group of Rajya Sabha interns, he said: “Therefore, we have judges that will legislate, who will perform executive functions, which will act as super parliament, and will absolutely have no responsibility because the law of the land does not apply to the subject.”
Mr. Dhankhar said his concerns were at a “very high level” and that he never thought of “my life” that will have the opportunity to see him.
He reminded the audience that the president of India is a very high position. The President takes an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
Others, including ministers, vice president, parliamentarians and judges lend an oath to comply with the Constitution.
“We cannot have a situation in which he directs the president of India and about the basics he has under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution by virtue of article 145 (3). There must be five judges or more …,” he said.
Supreme Court to the President on State Law
The SC judgment occurred in response to a request of November 2023 presented by the Government of Tamil Nadu against the state governor that indefinitely retains the assent to ten bills approved by the State Assembly, some since 2020.
The Supreme Court has put the President at a deadline of three months to decide whether or not to consent to the bills that referred to it by a governor. The clock would begin to mark from the day the governor sent the bill to the President for consideration.
“In the case of any delay beyond this period, the appropriate reasons would have to be registered and transmitted to the State in question,” said the Apex court in a sentence of April 8. The states, in turn, must cooperate with any consultation or suggestion of the center on the invoices.
A JB Bank JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan declared that the president should, as a measure of prudence, see the Council of the Supreme Court on invoices reserved by a governor for consideration for reasons of perception.
(With PTI inputs)
Published – April 17, 2025 05:14 pm ist