Supreme Court empowered to give directive to President: Justice Chelameswar

CHENNAI: Former judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Jasti Chelameswar, said the apex court is empowered to issue directions to the President to do an act, on the lines of the powers to scrutinise the legality of a law enacted by the Parliament.

He said this, justifying the recent order of the Supreme Court demanding that the President and the governors grant assent to bills enacted by the state Legislative Assembly within a time-bound manner.

Justice Chelameswar was delivering the Rakesh Endowment lecture titled 'The 75th year of the Constitution' here on Saturday.

He said if the Supreme Court and the high courts are able to subject a law enacted by the Parliament to judicial review and declare it unconstitutional, the courts can issue directions to the persons holding high public office as well.

"We have accepted in this country that the judiciary has the authority to decide whether a legislation is consistent with the Constitution or not. If you and I sitting as judges (of the Supreme Court and the high court) can declare a legislation enacted by the Parliament to be unconstitutional, to believe that they (Supreme Court judges) have no power to direct a public office holder (President) to do a particular act, to my mind, would be constitutionally doubtful," he said.

The former judge made the comments while answering a question raised by Justice CT Selvam, former judge of the Madras High Court, about certain persons, including Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar, questioning the powers of the Supreme Court in issuing a direction to the President.

Referring to the statements in support and against the order of the Supreme Court on granting assent to the bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, Justice Chelameswar said there wouldn't have been any controversy had the Supreme Court issued the direction to the Union government to give appropriate advice to the President regarding the bills.

"President, in the context of the Indian Constitution, acts on the aid and advice of the Union Cabinet. If the Supreme Court had directed the Union government to tender appropriate advice (to the President) in three months, there wouldn't have been any objection. The Supreme Court should have said the Union government should decide because, on your advice, the President acts. That would suffice," he said.

On Dhankar's verbal attacks, Justice Chelameswar said the "President could be directed (by the Supreme Court)."

On another question on the repugnancy between the Central and state laws, the former Supreme Court judge said the state law could prevail if it receives the assent of the President.

"There are two laws, one by the Parliament, the other by the state legislature, and if there is some repugnancy between both laws, then Article 254 of the Constitution will come into play. Now, if the matter is reserved for the President's assent, there is some conflict. Still, the state law can be saved under Article 254, provided the President gives the assent. If the President doesn't want to give the assent, what do we do?" he asked

To another question raised by Justice GR Swaminathan, sitting judge of Madras High Court, whether the journey of the Constitution is going in the right direction, he said it is a long march and there is no overnight solution.

The lecture was organised by the foundation, in cooperation with the Roja Muthiah Research Library, on the birth anniversary of Rakesh Ranganathan, the late son of senior advocate and DMK's Rajya Sabha Member NR Elango.