New Delhi, March 19
Wondering if state legislatures had the right to express their opinion on central laws, the Supreme Court on Friday asked an NGO—which raised the issue before it in a PIL—to do more research on the issue.
“We don’t want to create more problems than resolving the issue. We will see,” a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde told the petitioner’s counsel while deferring the hearing for four weeks.
Petitioner ‘Samata Andolan Samiti’ has challenged the legislative competence of different state assemblies in passing resolutions against central laws like Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the three farm laws, contending the subjects fell under the Union List of the Seventh Schedule.
The NGO made the Centre and the Speakers of the Legislative Assemblies of Punjab, Rajasthan, Kerala and West Bengal party in the petition, saying the apex court is already seized of multiple petitions challenging these laws passed by Parliament.
On behalf of the petitioner, senior advocate Soumya Chakraborty said state assemblies were incompetent to pass such resolutions against the central laws.
Referring to CAA law and the Kerala Assembly resolution, Chakraborty said the state legislature said that central law was against the basic structure of the Constitution as it did not grant citizenship to Muslims and gave it only to Hindus, Jains, Christians and Sikhs.
“This is the opinion of the majority of Kerala Assembly and this may not have the force of law. This is just an opinion. They have simply requested the Centre and sought repeal of the law. Do they have no right to express their opinion? They have not asked the people to disobey the Central law,” the Bench said.
The NGO has sought a direction “prohibiting all the state legislatures of India to discuss/debate/ adopt adverse resolutions never in regard to the subject matter of central legislations falling under the Union List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution in any manner whatsoever”.
However, the Bench asked, “How can you say that the assembly does not have the right to express their opinion?”
Discussions
Discussions
