Plea In SC Seeks Declaration That Citizens Have Fundamental Right To Petition Parliament Directly.

The Supreme Court directed on Friday that the Centre be served with a copy of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to declare that citizens have a fundamental right to directly petition Parliament and invite deliberation on important issues of public interest.

A Bench of Justice K.M. Joseph and Justice B.V. Nagarathna observed that it did not want to issue notice in the plea at this time and instead wanted to hear from the Centre on the practical aspects and the existing system.

“We are not issuing notice for the time being. We want to be told what is happening there (the existing system)”, the Bench stated.

The petition asked for a system with rules and a regulatory framework that would allow citizens to petition the Indian Parliament for debates, discussions, and deliberations on issues and concerns raised by citizens.

According to the PIL, if the framework is implemented, Parliament will be able to address citizens’ grievances in a proper manner. It also stated that the current system does not fully allow citizens to initiate debate in Parliament by submitting appropriate petitions.

During the hearing, one of the first questions posed by the Bench to the petitioner Karan Garg was,

“How is the writ petition maintainable against the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha? We are little taken aback.”

“A citizen can directly petition the Lok Sabha even today. What you are saying is that it is not effective, right?”, the Bench further questioned.

Given the vast population differences between India and the other countries where this system is used, the Bench concluded that it may not be feasible:

“There are two aspects to it. India’s population is more the Australia and UK (countries where this system is present). What will possibly happen if we were to recognise this? You want us to declare it the law be declared as part of Article 19(1) (a). Look at the practical aspect – how it will clog the working of the Parliament! Let us see what they have to say. Let’s see what is practically feasible.” (‘they’ here refers to the Centre Government).

“When you suggest something should be a Fundamental Right, it must be well thought through,” the Bench remarked as the case came to an end.

Nunnem Gangte

Recent Posts

“Engineer Rashid Can’t Be Allowed To Use Legislator Status For Reprieve”: NIA To Delhi HC

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) on Monday opposed jailed Jammu and Kashmir MP Sheikh Abdul…

16 hours ago

Delhi Jal Board Vandalism Case: Court Orders Supply Of Charge Sheets To Raghav Chadha

The Rouse Avenue Court has ordered that a copy of the charge sheet and supplementary…

17 hours ago

“We’ve To Trust Our Institutions”: SC On Plea Seeking Independent Method To Appoint CAG

The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Union Government on a petition…

18 hours ago

Delhi HC Impedes Restaurants From Using Names Similar To ‘Domino’s Pizza’

The Delhi High Court on Monday ruled in favor of Domino’s Pizza in a trademark…

19 hours ago

2023 Illegal Land Allotment Case: SC Rejects Bail Plea Of Ex-Gujarat IAS Officer

The Supreme Court on Monday denied bail to retired IAS officer Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma in…

20 hours ago

SC Lifts NGT Ban On Auroville Project, Stresses Balance Between Development & Environment

The Supreme Court on Monday set aside the National Green Tribunal’s order that had barred…

20 hours ago