States can’t move SC against President, Governor on bills: Centre

 

 

 

 

THE Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that State Governments cannot invoke writ jurisdiction in moving the apex court against the actions of the President and the Governor in dealing with the bills passed by assemblies for violation of fundamental rights. A five-judge bench Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai was told by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, that the President would like to have an opinion of the apex court on whether States can file writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for violation of fundamental rights. He said the President would also like to have an opinion on the scope of Article 361 of the Constitution which says the President, or the Governor will not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done.

 

Mehta told the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and AS Chandurkar that they have debated over these questions in the reference but the President is of the opinion that she would like to have the view of the court to know the exact legal position as issue may arise in the future. He submitted that Article 32 petition on behalf of the state against the action of the Governor and the President cannot be filed as it is not maintainable, no direction can be issued to them and thirdly the action of the Governor and the President in dealing with the bills is not justiciable. “Article 32 lies when there is violation of fundamental rights and State Government in the constitutional scheme does not in itself have the fundamental right. It is a repository of functions which is to protect fundamental rights of its people,” Mehta said.