SC verdict on TN Bills: Centre works on issues it’s aggrieved at to seek review-OxBig News Network

Almost a week after the Supreme Court delivered an unprecedented verdict setting a three-month timeframe for the President to decide on bills referred by Governors for her consideration, the Centre is working on issues it’s aggrieved at to seek review of the judgment.

The Centre is likely to seek review of the April 8 verdict delivered by a Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan as it has serious implications for discretionary powers of the President. The Constitution does not prescribe any timeframe for the President for taking decisions on mercy petitions under Article 72 of the Constitution as also judicial appointments which have been a bone of contention between the Centre and the Supreme Court Collegium.

Sources said the verdict set a three-month timeframe for the President without hearing the top constitutional office on the contentious issue. “There is a rationale behind the framers of the Constitution not prescribing any timeframe for the President,” they added.

Apart from the issue of restricting the President’s discretionary powers on Bills referred by Governors under Article 201 of the Constitution, the Centre is also understood to be aggrieved by the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the President should obtain the advisory opinion of the top court “by way of a reference under Article 143 and act in accordance with the same to dispel any apprehensions of bias, arbitrariness or mala fides.”

However, sources said, “The President can’t be forced to invoke the advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court by a judicial order.”

The Government was also understood to be aggrieved at the Supreme Court’s decision to grant “deemed assent” to 10 bills in question, they said, adding “Article 142 of the Constitution can’t be used to usurp legislative and executive functions.”