Surya Kant English news | Surya Kant, Latest News & Live Updates in English | English News (Latest English News) at Lokmattimes.com

Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran on the second day of hearing, appearing for former IAS officer Shah Faesal and Shehla Rashid, contended that the President didn't acquire the constituent powers of the J&K government under Article 370(I)(d), to give concurrence to a modification of the Constitution as applied to the state.He was challenging the concurrence given by then J&K Governor Satya Pal Malik to the decision."Hence, such power to give concurrence can't be exercised by the Governor either, as he is merely a delegate of the President in the state, under the President's Rule", he submitted before a five-judge Bench, headed by Justice N.V. Ramana and comprising Justices S.K. Kaul, R. Subhash Reddy, B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant.When the court observed that the normal power of the Governor couldn't be kept in abeyance, and by the virtue of this notification the Governor was empowered, Ramachandran said in a President's Rule situation and proclamation empowering the Governor, the other functional capacity of the Governor could be kept in abeyance.Justice Gavai said, "The proclamation says the Governor will act as a representative of the President." and queried Ramachandran that as per his argument the Governor couldn't have given concurrence as a Governor without opinion of the legislature.To this, Ramachandran argued the Governor's concurrence was undemocratic for want of public say. "The record indicates that neither the President nor the Governor held any consultations on the issue either with the public at large or with members of the legislative council", he said.Ramachandran also insisted the Governor during the period was only an agent of the President and his concurrence was undemocratic as it didn't have the backing of the people of the state.He contended that the purpose of Article 356 was to maintain the Constitution, and the exercise of this power was reversible and the President or the Governor couldn't take an action that was irreversible. "The state of J&K has ceased to exist. Now only court can restore it to its previous position," he said.When Justice Surya Kant queried petitioners on the competent authority to reconstitute the Constituent Assembly of the state, Ramachandran replied that the democratic route involving people should be followed, and unilateralism couldn't be allowed.(Sumit Saxena can be contacted at sumit.s@.in)( With inputs from IANS )

Surya KantFOLLOW

Surya kant, Latest News

Convicted gangster Mohammad Shahabuddin here on Wednesday complained to the Supreme Court that he was allegedly being kept in complete isolation in the Tihar jail. ...

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Centre to make it compulsory for mine leaseholders to re-grass the area after completing mining operations, and recommended this as a stringent condition part of the environmental clearance (EC) for mining. ...

The Supreme Court on Wednesday recommended the Centre to examine the possibility of a separate cadre within the CISF to secure courts. ...

The Madrassa Managing Committee of West Bengal on Wednesday moved the Supreme Court challenging its recent judgement by a two-judge bench allowing state to appoint teachers through a commission for minority institutions. ...

The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre to consider a plea seeking publicity of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) to clarify doubts that were contributing to circulation of fake news. ...

Citing the Nirbhaya gang-rape and murder case, the Supreme Court on Wednesday took suo moto cognizance of the issue of making criminal justice system more efficient towards rape and other sexual offences. The apex court seeks to examine the last-bit ...

The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the Bombay High Court judgement disallowing the coastal ring road project to connect north and south Mumbai. The order will allow the project to begin. ...

The petitioners challenging the Centre's decision to withdraw special status of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir submitted in the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the Governor had limited powers, which couldn't be used in a situation that requ ...