The Union federal government would be heard on August 19
The Supreme Court on Tuesday consented to hear initially an obstacle raised by Tamil Nadu and Kerala versus the maintainability of a Presidential Reference questioning the power of the court to draw timelines for the President and State Governors while handling State Bills sent out for approval.
A Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai stated the hearing on the Reference would start on August 19 with the 2 States, otherwise represented by senior supporters KK Venugopal, AM Singhvi and P. Wilson, getting an hour to persuade the court to return the Reference unanswered.
Venugopal, standing for Kerala, stated the Bench should hear the States on the concern of maintainability of the Reference before the Union federal government started its submissions in assistance of the Presidential concerns.
“An initial hearing must be hung on the maintainability of the Reference. This ought to be done initially,” Venugopal pushed.
Attorney General Of The United States of India R Venkataramani stepped in happily, stating the States should get their “complete say”, after which he would react to the concern of maintainability and continue with his submissions on behalf of the Reference.
The Bench, likewise making up Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and Atul Chandurkar, asked the celebrations to submit their particular written submissions on or prior to August 12.
The Union federal government would be heard on August 19, 20, 21, and 26. The opposing celebrations would send their reaction on August 28 and September 2, 3 and 9. The Union federal government would then rebut on September 10.
“Timelines need to be followed scrupulously,” the Chief Justice informed the attorneys.
The Bench stated no attorney, other than Venugopal, would be enabled to appear online. Mehta supported completely, states the recognized counsel was “sui generis” (special).
The States of Tamil Nadu and Kerala have actually prompted the court to dismiss the Presidential Reference, arguing it was an “appeal in camouflage”.
Kerala, represented by senior supporter KK Venugopal and CK Sasi, stated the President might just refer concerns to the Supreme Court under its advisory jurisdiction of Article 143 of the Constitution if they had actually not been chosen by the peak court.
Estimating judicial precedents, consisting of the 1993 Reference in the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the State stated powers of the Governors and the President under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution have actually been the topic of 3 different reliable judgments in the events submitted by the States of Telangana, Punjab and, lastly, Tamil Nadu on April 8.
The State explained that the Tamil Nadu Governor case judgment authored by Justice JB Pardiwala on April 8 had actually currently dealt with in information the concerns raised in the Presidential Reference in May.
“When the Supreme Court in its adjudicatory jurisdiction pronounces its reliable viewpoint on a concern of law, it can not be stated that there is any doubt about the concern of law or the very same is res integra so regarding need the President to understand what the real position of law on the concern is. The choice of this court on a concern of law is binding on all courts and authorities. The President can refer a concern of law just when this court has actually not chosen it,” Kerala sent.
If the federal government wished to challenge the April 8 judgment, it needs to have submitted an evaluation or an alleviative petition in the pinnacle court, and not take the path of Presidential Reference, Kerala has actually competed.
Released on July 29, 2025
