E-Paper
'You go to Parliament’: Supreme Court rejects plea seeking Article 142 powers for high courts
The top court last exercised its power under Article 142 in the case brought by the Tamil Nadu government against state governor RN Ravi
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by NGO Abhinav Bharat Congress, which sought the apex court's powers under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution to be granted to the high courts.
Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass “any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it” within the country.
ALSO READ | ‘We are alleged to be encroaching upon parliamentary, executive functions’: Supreme Court
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan wondered how the court could allow such a petition. “How can we grant such prayer? It requires an amendment to the Constitution. You go to Parliament. Prayer made in this petition is completely misconceived. Power conferred under Article 142 of the Constitution is only on this court and not the high courts. Therefore, we cannot allow high court to exercise power of this court under Article 142,” the bench said.
Most recent use of Article 142
The top court last exercised its power under Article 142 in the case brought by the Tamil Nadu government against state governor RN Ravi for his inordinate delay in granting assent to 10 bills passed by the state legislative assembly.
In its judgement, the apex court came down heavily on the governor for his “unconstitutional” actions and held that all state bills were deemed to have granted assent. All 10 bills were notified by the ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu as laws under the government gazette. The case marked an historic development in India's federal history where state bills became laws without the governor's assent.
ALSO READ | Timelines set on bills extend to President’s Office: Supreme Court in TN govt vs Governor case
The judgment by a bench of justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan also set clear timelines for the governor to decide on granting or withholding assent to bills passed by the state legislative assembly or referring them to the president. The specific timelines apply not just to governors but also to the President to act on state legislation - a first in India's constitutional history.
The development seemed to have set off a face-off between the top court and the executive, with Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankar slamming the use of Article 142 as a “nuclear missile”. The Rajya Sabha chairman also criticised the court for acting as a “super parliament.”
Opposition leaders launched sharp criticism in response to Dhankhar. Several parties, including the Congress, Trinamool Congress (TMC), the DMK, and prominent legal voices, accused the Vice President of undermining the judiciary and “bordering on contempt.”
