VP Jagdeep Dhankhar has strongly criticised the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that mandates a three-month timeline for the President to act on bills forwarded by state governors. Calling it a threat to constitutional authority, Dhankhar questioned the judiciary’s power to issue such directives to the President of India.
Speaking to the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns at the Vice President’s Enclave, Dhankhar expressed deep concern over the judiciary’s intervention. “We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India. And on what basis? Where are we heading as a nation?” he said.
Constitutional standoff in Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court’s ruling, delivered on April 8, came amid a constitutional standoff in Tamil Nadu. The state government had approached the court after Governor RN Ravi delayed assent to several bills for extended periods. The apex court responded by setting a three-month deadline for the President to decide on bills referred by governors.
A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and SM Subramaniam Mahadevan observed that any delay beyond the stipulated time must be adequately justified. The Court also emphasised the need for cooperation between state governments and the Centre to maintain the federal structure.
Dhankhar, however, argued that the Constitution grants the judiciary the power to interpret laws not to direct the President. Citing Article 145(3) of the Constitution, he said, “The only right you have is to interpret the Constitution with a bench of five or more judges. Directives to the President fall outside that scope.”
Vice President’s remarks have triggered a fresh debate over the separation of powers among the executive, legislature, and judiciary. Legal experts and political analysts are closely watching how this constitutional conflict unfolds, especially in light of increasing tensions between state governments and the governors appointed by the Centre.
ALSO READ: Who Is Smita Sabharwal? IAS Officer In The Midst Of Telangana’s Gachibowli Forest Controversy