Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankar commented on 17th April, 2025 on the Supreme Court setting a timeline for the President and Governors to take decision, that it is acting as a “Super Parliament”. Asiriyar Dr. K. Veeramani, President of the Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) released a statement expressing displeasure over the Vice-President questioning the judiciary. The content of his statement was in brief as follows:-
The Governor of Tamil Nadu, Thiru.R.N. Ravi had kept pending for a very long period without granting assent, 10 Bills passed formally in the State Assembly by the Government of Tamil Nadu. He had failed to show deference to the Constitution; the bedrock of democracy. Seeking legal remedy, the Government of Tamil Nadu moved the Supreme Court. The Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadeven pronounced a historic verdict on 8th of April, 2025. The Land Mark Judgment pronounced all its deemed to be assent to all the 10 Bills on which the Governor did not act on. The print media and all the eminent legal experts have hailed the Supreme Court for establishing ‘Complete Justice’.
Related articles
Complete Justice
The Supreme Court had been pointing out the lack of bonafides on the part of the Governor. His adamant inaction was termed unacceptable. Several advice and opportunities stood ignored. Since redressing the grievance of Tamil Nadu was inevitable, and as there was a dire need of complete justice, the Supreme Court adhered to Article 142 of the Constitution and exercised its extraordinary powers, pronouncing the verdict that all the 10 Bills are deemed to be assented on 18th November, 2023 itself. (on which date the State Legislative Assembly had passed the Bills for the second time and sent to the Governor)
Precedent in the Past
The Supreme Court had already set a precedent in the past, exercising its powers. When the release of Thiru. Perarivalan of Tamil Nadu was kept in abeyance by the Governor and the President, the Supreme Court ordered his release in the interest of the rights and liberty of an individual. The recent verdict is just another instance of extraordinary powers exercised by the Supreme Court. It has also fixed a time line of one month for the Governors and three months for the President to grant assent to the Bills reserved for their consideration. Prolonged decision and unreasonable inaction have been prohibited by this historic judgment.
Fuming over the verdict, the Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankar has strongly rebuked and slammed the Supreme Court. This is quite unfair on his part and also beyond the propriety expected from a senior constitutional post holder of his stature.
Judiciary Questioned
The Vice-President has let out three comments seeking replies of Judiciary:
- How dare a timeline set for the President!
- The Supreme Court has used Article – 142 of the Constitution and fired a nuclear missile at democratic forces.
- A heap of currency notes was found burnt in the house of the Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Sharma. There was no report even after the lapse of a week. The news became viral only when a leading newspaper published it.
The third comment is irrelevant to the verdict of the Supreme Court. He has needlessly blamed it on the judiciary that the probe was at a slow pace without even filing an F.I.R. He has also questioned the deputation of the judge concerned to another High Court.
Our replies to the Vice-President
- Article – 142 of the Constitution insists on ‘Complete Justice’. It is an exceptional adumbration. Hence, finding fault with it is not fair at all, since it is an armour protecting democracy.
- ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’. Neither the President nor a Governor is above the legal codes specified by the Constitution. The Supreme Court has fulfilled its duty as per the decorum. The time line has been fixed only to ensure ‘Complete justice’. Hence there is nothing undesirable about it.
For the attention of common people
- Adhering to the Constitution, who makes the President take an oath during the swearing – in ceremony? It is the Chief Justice of India in the Supreme Court.
- When the President needs clarification in a legal problem he/she generally seeks the assistance of only the Supreme Court judges to offer suggestions with reference to the Constitution.
- The recent verdict of the Supreme Court has in no way belittled the glory of the President. The time line fixed is to be considered merely as a guideline to ensure that the President fulfils duties satisfactorily in a democratic country. The recent verdict of the Supreme Court has only plugged the holes in judiciary under the purview of the President. The verdict has not expressed anything undesirable. An unbiased view is required in this issue.
Termination of Rajya Sabha members
As the leader of the House, Jagdeep Dhankar once terminated 153 Rajyasabha members at just one stroke. Was it in any way justified in accordance to the codes of democracy? Was it a fair action on his part?
Certain exemptions granted by the Constitution to Governors and the President are in honour of their ceremonial offices; not the grant of right to supersede the Constitution and the laws. The right to analyse the laws enacted by the Parliament is vested in the Supreme Court; nowhere else. It is nowhere stated in the Constitution that an assent of the President should not be analysed or questioned. An incident at the house of a High Court judge is in no way connected to the issue concerned. The instance cited by the Vice-President is undeniably odd since it has no relevance.
Unexplained inaction
Infact, the Police Department should have filed an F.I.R. in that particular incident and proceeded with an action against the judge concerned who was the prime suspect. What caused the inaction?
The Governance of Delhi and the Police Department were under the control of the Union Government’s Ministry of Home Affairs. What is the action taken so far by the ministry concerned? The ruling BJP should have initiated step for impeachment through its members in the Parliament or the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) should have taken proper steps. When a judge was found suspect in a crime and when something seemed to be really fishy, why were the ruling BJP, the members of the Parliament, the Delhi Police Department and other administrators silent spectators? What was the mystery behind their inaction in that particular incident of currency notes in fire?
Democracy at cul-de-sac
While this mystery continues to remain unsolved, the judiciary is being questioned for establishing complete justice, adhering to Article – 142 of the Constitution. It is an irony, indeed. We would become the butt of ridicule when the entire world comes to know of this mockery in detail. Democracy is today at a blind alley, with no way out from the dead-end. Is this a matter of pride for the Union Government? People who always have an unbiased, neutral stand should think over deeply and decide in a disinterested manner who would at last be laughed at by the world. Let us hope, we are never ever mocked at, since we are all true guardians of the Constitution and democracy.
Courtesy: ‘Vidhuthalai’ – 19th April 2025
