Home INDIA Governor’s Post Serious, Must Act Under Constitution: Supreme Court Judge

Governor’s Post Serious, Must Act Under Constitution: Supreme Court Judge

by Alexander
0 comment
Governor's post Seriously, must act according to the Constitution: Supreme Court Justice


She said it’s quite embarrassing when governors are told to do or not do something.


Supreme Court Justice BV Nagarathna on Saturday warned against cases of governors sitting indefinitely on bills passed by elected legislators, citing the case involving the Punjab governor.

In her keynote address at the inaugural session of the fifth edition of Courts and the Constitution Conference held at NALSAR University of Law here, Justice Nagarathna spoke of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly case as another example of governor overreach, where the governor did not have sufficient material. to indicate the floor test.

“This is not a healthy trend under the Constitution to bring the acts or omissions of the governor of a state for consideration before constitutional courts,” she said.

“I think I must appeal that the office of governor, even though it is called a governmental post, the post of the governor is a serious constitutional post, the governors must discharge their duties under the constitution in accordance with the Constitution so that these types of litigation in the courts are reduced,” Justice Nagarathna added.

She said it’s quite embarrassing when governors are told to do or not do something.

So, a time has come where they are now being told to perform their duties according to the Constitution, she said.

Justice Nagathna’s comments came days after a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed “serious concerns” over the conduct of Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi over his refusal to appoint DMK leader K Ponmudi to be reinstated as a minister in the state cabinet.

Justice Nagarathna also spoke about her dissent on the demonetization case.

She said she had to disagree with the central government’s move because in 2016, when the decision was announced, Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes constituted 86 percent of the total notes in circulation, and 98 percent of them were returned . after they were banned.

In October 2016, the Indian government demonetized Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes, ostensibly as a blow against black money.

“I thought that through this demonetization it was a way to convert money into white money because firstly, 86 percent of the currency was demonetized and 98 percent of the currency came back and became white money. All uncounted money went back to the bank. .

“That’s why I thought this was a good way to get missing cash into the account. That’s why the situation of this common man really stirred me. That’s why I had to give a dissenting opinion,” the judge said.

The conference heard speeches from judges of the High Courts of Nepal and Pakistan, Justices Sapana Pradhan Malla and Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

Telangana High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradh and NALSAR Chancellor Justice S. Ravindra Bhat also spoke at the conference, a NALSAR press release said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by WhatsNew2Day staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

You may also like