The Supreme Court asked Kerala and Tamil Nadu to explain why they objected to President Droupadi Murmu seeking the court’s opinion under Article 143. Chief Justice BR Gavai directed the states’ lawyers to clarify their objections.
The reference follows the April 8 Supreme Court ruling that set deadlines for Governors and the President to approve bills. The court said it is giving a legal view, not deciding the Tamil Nadu case.
Justice Surya Kant added that the court acts in advisory, not appellate, jurisdiction. Attorney General R Venkataramani said Articles 200 and 201, which govern Governor and President powers, are part of the Constitution’s basic structure. He argued that the April judgment limits these powers.
Kerala and Tamil Nadu asked the court to dismiss the reference, claiming it could overrule previous judgments. The Central government supported the reference, saying Governors’ and the President’s powers cannot be limited by judicial timelines. The hearing will continue on Wednesday.