Supreme Court Hearing-Presidential Reference On Timelines For Bills' Assent-DAY-5 : Live Updates

CJI: earlier suggestion was 6 weeks but it was made as soon as possible- one member said the purpose was to make it immediately therefore, the framers expected that the Governor would decide expeditiously so can we ignore the expectations of the framers?

SG: American law, I generally do not cite but, in American constitution law, states can't assert as parens patriae under original jurisdiction- State there are completely independent and court have said these are federal issues. We have cited American cases that they said that you can't come to Supreme Court because these are political issues.

On Article 226- when would it empower entitle the high court- examine a situation, if the Governor grants assent- can someone aggreived by that can he challenge before high court and it issue mandamus?

CJI: that's a totally different situation, once law is implemented but question is, when Governor sits over a bill passed by legislature even on second occasion, can he sit time immemorial?

SG: justification will not confer jurisdiction. They choose to not undertake any political process otherwise other States...

SG: mylords have exempted this when concerned petitioner is unable to approach

CJI: on account of social or economic [constraints]

SG: this would be very relevant- imagine a converse situation- a law and order situation has arisen where there is eruption of violence and local police is unable to contain it and if central government says you deploy paramilitary but State refuses- so can a central government file a petition under Article 32 seeking direction for state to deploy paramilitary? My answer is no.

SG: similar judgment is where they say even private party can't come under Article 32 unless they show fundamental rights violation.

can one jurisdiction of the high court or supreme court be barred by another?- this issue arose when Karnataka came under Article 32 for water dispute- Court said we have Article 262 for inter-state disputes.

Possible argument that we are coming in representative capacity- they do represent the will of people but question is, would that entitle them to come under Article 32?

SG: First, whether writ petition under Article 32 would lie at behest of State Government? Two objections- a. 32 lies when violation of fundamental rights and state government constitutionally form does not have the fundamental right. It is a repository of functions which is to protect fundamental rights of others.

One judgment-house was prerogative and one member approached mylords on whether Article 32 would lie- bear one factor in mind, there are chapters under Constitution- Article 200 in chapter which starts with legislative procedure-Article 196 heading- provisions as to introduction and passing of Bills- that's how legislative process starts and goes to Article 200 and it culminatives when Governor exercises one of the four choices or President exercises Article 201 when bill reserved.

It has as much sanctity is that of the House when bill is passed. It is a part of a legislative process and question would be- can any part be subjected to writ jurisdiction?

SG Mehta: There is time limit prescribed- Governor can't even be called upon. In substance, the court may not use that way but I am using- it says the President decide within 3 months and if she doesn't do it, come to us! After considerable debate, we decided that we must know what is the legal position.

SG Mehta: Not only petition would lie, it would lie on these grounds.

SG Mehta: Under scheme of the constitution, whether a writ would lie against the Governor? Article 356 provides a contigency and mylords do not issue mandamus Governor but setting aside the order of the Governor recommending Presidential rule.

SG Mehta: None of us assisted but I am going to be the only one assisting on these issues.

reference to TN judgment made- this will have to be examined since questions will keep arising-this question of purely legal nature is justiciable. 

SG: out of all questions, two questions- whether writ petition under Article 32/226 would lie at behest of government and second, scope of Article 361- Honourable President would like your opinion. Opinion is requested when situation arise or likely to arise-I am showing the view in TN judgment- there is a legal view decided.