{"id":49098,"date":"2025-07-24T21:00:15","date_gmt":"2025-07-24T15:30:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/?p=49098"},"modified":"2025-07-30T12:30:02","modified_gmt":"2025-07-30T07:00:02","slug":"can-presidential-reference-change-a-judgment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/24-07-2025\/can-presidential-reference-change-a-judgment","title":{"rendered":"Can Presidential Reference Change a Judgment?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Syllabus: GS2\/Polity and Governance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>The Supreme Court<\/strong> has issued notices to the<strong> Union Government and all States<\/strong> on Presidential reference on the President and Governor\u2019s powers.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The SC seeks opinion on whether the<strong> President and Governors can be judicially compelled to act within prescribed timelines<\/strong> on Bills passed by State legislatures.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Background<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Recently, the Supreme Court verdict <strong>laid down a timeline for the President and governors to decide on state bills.<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Generally, the Governor is not bound by any time limit to act on a Bill.<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This creates a situation where the Governor can simply not act on a Bill indefinitely this is referred to as a<strong> &#8220;Pocket Veto&#8221;<\/strong>, although the term is not officially used in the Constitution.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Supreme Court ruled that <strong>Governors cannot delay or withhold assent to Bills indefinitely <\/strong>once they are passed or re-passed by the state Assembly.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The ruling set a timeline for the Governor to act on Bills:<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>One month for re-passed Bills.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Three months if the Bill is withheld contrary to Cabinet advice.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It raises questions about the<strong> scope of judicial authority under Article 142,<\/strong> and whether the<strong> courts can enforce accountability on constitutional functionaries like Governors and the President.<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>President Droupadi Murmu sought the Supreme Court\u2019s advisory opinion <strong>under Article 143<\/strong> on<strong> whether the President and governors need to follow timelines to decide on state bills.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Article 143 Presidential Reference<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Article 143(1): <\/strong>The President can refer any<strong> question of law or fact that is of public importance<\/strong> to the Supreme Court for its advisory opinion.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Court may <strong>choose to answer or decline, <\/strong>however, if the court chooses not to respond, it must record its reasons.\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The opinion is not binding, but is highly respected:<\/strong> In<strong> Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (1991)<\/strong>, the court reiterated that <strong>advisory opinions are entitled to \u201cdue weight and respect\u201d<\/strong> and are <strong>\u201cnormally followed.\u201d <\/strong>However, it <strong>refrained from settling the question of their binding nature<\/strong>, observing that the issue could be revisited at a more appropriate time.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The court is bound to <strong>limit itself strictly to the questions<\/strong> referred by the President and cannot exceed the scope of the Reference.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Constitution extended the provision in the <strong>Government of India Act, 1935<\/strong> to seek the opinion of the Federal Court on questions of law to questions of fact as well, including certain hypotheticals.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Article 145(3)<\/strong> requires any such reference to be heard by <strong>five judges<\/strong>, after which the SC returns the reference to the President with the <strong>majority opinion<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Need for the Article:<\/strong> Under the Constitution, the President acts on the aid and advice of the Cabinet.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The advisory jurisdiction allows the President the means to <strong>seek independent advice to act on certain constitutional matters.\u00a0<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It is a power that the President has invoked on at least 15 occasions since 1950.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Can the court overturn its April 8 ruling through the Reference?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>In the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal Reference, the Supreme Court held that:<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Article 143<\/strong> cannot be used by the executive to seek a review or reversal of settled judicial decisions.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Court warned against framing questions that indirectly reopen previously decided cases.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>In Natural Resources Allocation (2012), the SC clarified:<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>There is no constitutional bar on the Court refining or restating a legal opinion under Article 143(1).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This is permissible as long as the core reasoning and rights of parties in the original case remain unaffected.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>There<\/strong><strong>fore, the April 8 judgment is final and bin<\/strong><strong>ding.<\/strong> However, its legal findings may still be <strong>refined or elaborated <\/strong>upon by the Constitution Bench.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The current Reference includes 14 questions of law, which are largely related to the April 8 ruling but are not limited to it.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It raises broader issues on the scope and use of the Supreme Court\u2019s discretionary powers under the Constitution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Source: <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/news\/national\/can-the-supreme-courts-opinion-on-a-presidential-reference-alter-its-prior-ruling\/article69837501.ece\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>TH<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<h3><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h3>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">The Supreme Court has issued notices to the Union Government and all States on Presidential reference on the President and Governor\u2019s powers.<\/li>\n<p><\/p>\n<h3><strong>Background<\/strong><\/h3>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Recently, the Supreme Court verdict laid down a timeline for the President and governors to decide on state bills.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Generally, the Governor is not bound by any time limit to act on a Bill.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">This creates a situation where the Governor can simply not act on a Bill indefinitely this is referred to as a &#8220;Pocket Veto&#8221;, although the term is not officially used in the Constitution.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">The Supreme Court ruled that Governors cannot delay or withhold assent to Bills indefinitely once they are passed or re-passed by the state Assembly.<\/li>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/24-07-2025\/can-presidential-reference-change-a-judgment\" class=\"btn btn-primary btn-sm float-end\">Read\u00a0More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49098","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-current-affairs"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49098","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49098"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49098\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":49116,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49098\/revisions\/49116"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49098"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49098"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49098"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}