The State of Kerala said the Centre should not have advised President Droupadi Murmu to issue a Presidential Reference, “obliquely” challenging the Tamil Nadu Governor case judgment prescribing timelines for the President and Governors to deal with State Bills, for the sole reason that the Union Council of Ministers did not see eye-to-eye with the Supreme Court verdict of April 8.
Can Supreme Court’s opinion on a Presidential Reference alter its prior ruling?
“The fact that the Council of Ministers advising the President disagree with or do not accept a judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court is no basis to exercise the power under Article 143 by advising the President to refer questions that are no longer res integra for this Court to decide. Such jurisdiction does not vest in this Court, nor can it be vested in it by the Council of Ministers under Article 143,” Kerala argued in its submissions prepared by senior advocate K.K. Venugopal and advocate C.K. Sasi.
The State said the questions referred by the President were no longer res integra (an unaddressed question of law).
Governors are not aliens, but checks on States’ ‘hasty legislation’: Centre to Supreme Court
