President Droupadi Murmu Invokes Article 143 for Judicial Review
President Droupadi Murmu Questions SC Ruling on fixed timelines for Governors and the President to clear state bills, marking a rare constitutional move by invoking Article 143 reference. The President’s decision comes in the wake of a recent Supreme Court India judgment that imposed specific deadlines on constitutional authorities for approving state bills clearance. This development has triggered a national debate over the separation of powers and the limits of judicial intervention in executive duties.
In a move that has gained widespread attention, President Droupadi Murmu Questions SC Ruling by formally referring the issue to the apex court under Article 143 of the Constitution of India. The reference questions whether the Supreme Court can mandate timelines for the President and Governors to act on bill assent timelines, especially considering the discretionary powers granted under the Constitution.
President Invokes Article 143 for Judicial Review
The Presidential reference 2025, as reported by Hindustan Times, seeks a detailed opinion from the Supreme Court on whether it has overstepped its bounds by imposing fixed deadlines. By invoking Article 143 reference, President Droupadi Murmu has effectively opened a judicial review into the court’s authority on matters involving executive discretion.
The reference is also viewed as a response to increasing judicial scrutiny of delays in Governor assent delay cases, particularly in states where friction between the state government and the Governor’s office has been evident.
Challenge to Supreme Court’s Ruling on Bill Approval Timelines
The core of the matter lies in the Supreme Court India ruling that directed Governors and the President to act within a reasonable timeframe on state bills. This directive was seen as an attempt to address prolonged bill assent timeline issues. However, the Union government and now the President have raised concerns about its constitutional validity.
Legal experts argue that while delays in state bills clearance are problematic, imposing strict deadlines may disrupt the balance of power envisioned in the Constitution of India. The reference seeks to clarify this legal grey area.
Debate Over Constitutional Powers of Governors and the President
With President Droupadi Murmu Questions SC Ruling, the focus shifts to the interpretation of the President’s and Governor’s roles in the legislative process. The Constitution does not specify exact timelines, allowing for discretion. Critics argue that the judiciary’s interference may dilute this authority.
On the other hand, supporters of the Supreme Court’s decision argue that unreasonable Governor assent delay undermines democracy by stalling elected state governments’ legislative agendas.
Implications of Article 143 Reference on Legislative Processes
This move could set a significant precedent. If the Supreme Court revises or reaffirms its earlier ruling, it will redefine the legislative process across India. The Presidential reference 2025 is expected to shape future legal interpretations of state bills clearance and the boundaries of constitutional roles.
For now, as Droupadi Murmu Questions SC Ruling, all eyes remain on the apex court’s response and its impact on the evolving relationship between the judiciary and executive in India.
Stay tuned with Notifire for the latest updates on constitutional developments, judicial reviews, and key decisions shaping India’s democracy.
