Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Seeking Framework For Citizens To Directly Petition To Parliament
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking a framework which would allow citizens to petition directly to the Parliament. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala heard the matter.The petition sought for a framework under which citizens can prepare petitions, seek popular support for them it and if a petition crosses a...
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking a framework which would allow citizens to petition directly to the Parliament. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala heard the matter.
The petition sought for a framework under which citizens can prepare petitions, seek popular support for them it and if a petition crosses a prescribed threshold that it should be taken up mandatorily for discussion and debate in Parliament.
At the very outset, CJI DY Chandrachud expressed his disinclination to words taking up the matter and said–
"How can we entertain a petition of this nature? What is your relief? This is unheard of. How can we tell the Parliament?"
Justice Narasimha voicing a similar opinion said–
"There is the subcommittee in the Parliament which takes care of grievances, it processes applications."
However, the petitioner argued that the model suggested by the petitioner was a Westminster style of model and that citizens should be permitted to participate in a better way in a democracy. The bench remained unconvinced and stated that while other countries may have different models, India had its own model in place.
In this context, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta along with Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati argued that a procedure was already in place for the receipt of petitions, which were considered by the Committee for Petitions.
Therefore, the court declined to entertain the petition and stated–
"The reliefs which have been sought fall exclusively within the domain of Parliament. Such directions cannot be issued by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution."
Case Title: Karan Garg v. Union of India & Ors | WP(C) 39/2023
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 235
Constitution of India -Article 32- SC refuses to entertain petition seeking a framework which would allow citizens to petition directly to the Parliament-The reliefs which have been sought fall exclusively within the domain of Parliament. Such directions cannot be issued by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution.