No contempt of court if Parliament, state legislature simply make laws: Supreme Court
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
The Supreme Court has said any law made by Parliament or a state legislature cannot be held to contempt of court A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma made the observation while disposing of a 2012 contempt plea filed by sociologist and former Delhi University professor Nandini Sundar and others.The contempt plea alleged failure of the Chhattisgarh government to comply with its 2011 directions to stop support to vigilante groups like Salwa Judum and arming tribals in the name of special police officers (SPO) in the fight against Maoists.The petition contended that there has been contempt of the order of the apex court as the Chhattisgarh government has legislated the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011 which authorised an auxiliary armed force to assist security forces in dealing with Maoist/Naxal violence and legalising existing SPOs by inducting them as members.Besides accusing the Chhattisgarh Government of not acknowledging the directions on Salwa Judum, the petitioners said instead of "desisting" from using SPOs and disarming them, the state government passed the "Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011" regularising all SPOs with effect from the date of the top court order on July 5, 2011.They alleged that state government has also not vacated all school buildings and ashrams from the occupation of the security force nor has it compensated the victims of Salwa Judum and SPOs.The top court on May 15 said that the passing of an enactment subsequent to the order passed by the top court by Chhattisgarh cannot be an act of contempt.The top court said in order to ensure that rule of law permeates to fulfil constitutional objectives of establishing an egalitarian social order, the balance between the respective sovereign functionaries must always be delicately maintained."Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a Constitutional Court, the said enactment would have the force of law."The bench added, "However, if any party wishes that the said Act be struck down for being unconstitutional, then legal remedies in that regard would have to be resorted to before the competent court of law."Considering the situation prevailing in Chhattisgarh over decades, the bench outlined the need for "specific steps" to bring peace and rehabilitation in the affected areas through coordinated measures of the state and the Central Government."It is duty of the State of Chhattisgarh as well as the Union of India , having regard to Article 315 of the Constitution, to take adequate steps for bringing about peace and rehabilitation to the residents of State of Chhattisgarh who have been affected by the violence from whatever quarter it may have arisen," the court said.Judiciary is vested under the Constitution with the power to resolve interpretive doubts and disputes about the validity or otherwise of an enacted law by Parliament or any state legislature, the bench added."However, the interpretative power of a Constitutional Court does not contemplate a situation of declaring exercise of legislative functions and passing of an enactment as an instance of a contempt of a Court," it noted.The verdict pointed out that central to the legislative function was the power of the legislative organ to enact and amend laws."Any law made by the Parliament or a State legislature cannot be held to be an act of contempt of a Court, including this Court, for simply making the law," the bench said.The top court underlined the legislature's powers to pass a law; to remove the basis of a judgment or in the alternative, validate a law which has been struck down by a constitutional court by amending or varying it so as to give effect to the judgment of a constitutional court which has struck down a portion of an enactment or for that matter the entire enactment."This is the core of the doctrine of separation of powers and must always be acknowledged in a constitutional democracy such as ours. This doctrine also emphasises on the principle of checks and balances under our Constitution which is a healthy aspect of distribution of powers, particularly legislative powers."The order went on, "Any piece of legislation enacted by a legislature can be assailed within the manner known to law and that is by mounting a challenge against its validity on the twin prongs of legislative competence or constitutional validity ."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs from the Education Department under Trump's federal downsizing push
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs in the Education Department. In a ruling that could permanently alter the landscape of American public education, the US Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education, a key step in President Trump's broader plan to decentralise federal control and shift responsibility for education back to the states. The court's unsigned emergency order effectively lifts a lower court's block on the administration's move to terminate more than 1,300 federal employees. Critics say this will gut the department's core functions, including oversight of civil rights protections in schools, financial aid distribution, and special education services. The Education Department began 2025 with over 4,000 employees. Post-layoffs, the workforce is expected to shrink by nearly half, after including probationary dismissals and voluntary resignations. Particularly affected is the Office for Civil Rights, where seven out of twelve regional offices have already been shut down. Judiciary expands presidential power The Supreme Court's decision marks another major expansion of executive power, signalling judicial backing for Trump's efforts to reconfigure, or even dismantle, a department created by Congress nearly 50 years ago. The ruling did not include a vote breakdown, but liberal justices dissented strongly. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing on behalf of Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, warned that the court was enabling an unconstitutional overreach. She argued that only Congress has the power to eliminate a cabinet-level department, and that the administration's unilateral action would inflict "untold harm" on students, particularly those affected by discrimination, disability, or lack of educational access. From the executive order to legal showdown President Trump had signed an executive order in March directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of shutting down the department. He cited low student test scores and bureaucratic inefficiency as justification for transferring federal education functions back to the states. Almost immediately, legal challenges erupted. School districts, education unions, and 21 Democratic-led states filed lawsuits in federal court, arguing that dismantling the department without congressional approval violated the Constitution and federal statutes. Judge Myong Joun of the US District Court in Massachusetts had sided with the plaintiffs in May, ordering the administration to halt layoffs and reinstate fired workers. His ruling was later upheld by the First Circuit Court of Appeals. But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now reversed course, allowing the layoffs to resume while the underlying legal battle continues. Reactions split along political lines Trump and his allies celebrated the ruling as a victory for local control and executive leadership. The White House reiterated that the president has full constitutional authority to reorganise federal agencies, and said the cuts were necessary to streamline operations and reduce federal overreach. Education Secretary McMahon stated that the department will proceed with a reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability, while continuing to carry out statutory duties with a scaled-back staff. Democratic lawmakers and education advocates condemned the decision. Senator Chuck Schumer said the move amounts to sabotage of public education, adding that it's American kids paying the price. Sheria Smith, president of the union representing Education Department workers, warned that the firings would disrupt critical programs and services that millions of families rely on. What comes next While the court's decision allows the layoffs to proceed immediately, the underlying lawsuits are far from over. Courts are still examining whether the Trump administration's move to essentially dismantle the department violates congressional authority and statutory mandates. Meanwhile, the impact is already rippling through the education system. Several states have reported delays in federal funding for after-school programs, summer learning, and civil rights compliance. With fewer federal employees in place to monitor and enforce these mandates, education equity advocates fear that marginalised students will suffer the most. The future of the Education Department, and the federal role in American schooling, now hangs in a precarious legal and political balance. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Hans India
40 minutes ago
- Hans India
US Supreme Court allows Trump to shrink Education Department
Washington: The US Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with its plan to dismantle the Department of Education after pausing a preliminary injunction issued by a US district judge in May. In a 6-3 emergency ruling, the Supreme Court lifted the district judge's order to reinstate employees terminated in mass layoffs, Xinhua news agency reported. On May 22, Boston-based US District Judge Myong Joun ordered the Trump administration to reinstate nearly 1,400 workers affected by mass layoffs at the department. US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston stated that the layoffs "will likely cripple the department." This marks the second significant victory for Trump from the Supreme Court within a week. Last week, the Court paved the way for Trump's extensive plan to reduce the federal workforce, overturning lower court rulings that had temporarily blocked the initiative. The dismantling of the education department is part of the US President's plan to reduce the federal government's role in education and increase state control. A group of 21 Democratic attorneys general, along with school districts and unions, has filed two legal challenges, asserting that Trump's efforts to shut down the Department of Education could hinder its ability to fulfill its essential responsibilities. Established by Congress in 1979, the Department of Education has several key roles, including administering college loans, monitoring student performance, and enforcing civil rights in schools. Additionally, it provides federal funding to support underfunded districts and assist students with disabilities.
Hindustan Times
43 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Maratha outfits vow to get back for attack on Sambhaji Brigade founder
MUMBAI: The attack on Sambhaji Brigade's founding member Pravin Gaikwad on Sunday by BJP office-bearer Deepak Kate and other people affiliated to the Shivdharma Foundation in Akkalkot, Solapur, has evoked strong reactions from Maratha outfits. Gaikwad was assaulted for making allegedly derogatory remarks about Swami Samarth Maharaj and also for not changing the name of his outfit to Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj Brigade. Pune,India - June 21.2017:Picture By Pravin Gaikwad in Book Launch in Balgandharva Auditorium in Pune, India, on Wednesday, June 21.2017. (Pic By Rahul Raut ) While opposition parties, which demanded strong action against the attackers, raised the issue in the state legislature on Monday, the Maratha outfits held a joint meeting in Pune. Shrikant Shirole, a Maratha leader, said that a committee would be formed to decide the further course of action. Virendra Pawar, coordinator of the Sakal Maratha Samaj, said this was an attack on all Maratha organisations and Marathas, 'carried out with the intention of diverting attention from key issues'. Maratha Seva Sangh president Purushottam Khedekar, on his part, lambasted the RSS. 'The RSS tries to corrupt society's brains, and the attack on Gaikwad was part of the design,' he said. 'We will have to retaliate unitedly.' Gaikwad was pulled out of his car and manhandled by Deepak Kate when he reached Akkalkot to attend a function. Kate is the general secretary of the Bharatiya Yuva Janata Morcha. Gaikwad said that people with progressive thoughts were living under threat since 2014. 'Activists with a secular ideology are insecure today, but we follow the ideology aligned with the Constitution,' he said. 'This was a planned attack, and the state government is responsible for it. The prime accused in my case is facing 10 serious cases, and even yesterday's attack was similar to an attempt to murder. Despite this, he is being shielded by the state government. The police are being directed to go soft on him.' Former Maharashtra BJP chief and revenue minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule claimed that the BJP would not 'stoop to this level'. 'Deepak Kate is our office-bearer but what he did is not justifiable, and action should be taken against him,' he said after a video of Kate with him went viral on social media on Monday. Responding to the Opposition after the issue was raised in the state assembly, chief minister Devendra Fadnavis said the police had arrested the accused though Gaikwad was not willing to make a formal complaint. 'Strict action will be taken against the accused under the applicable laws,' he said. The attack on Gaikwad, a prominent Maratha leader, is also seen as an attempt to consolidate non-Marathas before the upcoming local body polls. 'Sambhaji Brigade shot to fame in 2004 after it vandalised the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute in Pune, where American scholar James Laine researched his book on Shivaji,' said an opposition leader. 'The vandals claimed the book had objectionable references to Shivaji Maharaj. A certain community harboured anger against Sambhaji Brigade after that attack. Sunday's attack, planned to pit the two communities against each other, could be part of the political consolidation plan.'
