{"id":228264,"date":"2020-04-14T11:00:34","date_gmt":"2020-04-14T05:30:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=228264"},"modified":"2020-07-14T21:04:15","modified_gmt":"2020-07-14T15:34:15","slug":"article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/","title":{"rendered":"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists"},"content":{"rendered":"

Amid the din against the CAA-NRC combine, a fresh challenge under a seldom employed and much less provocative provision of the Constitution of India has emerged. As per \u00ad\u00adthe ostensible remit of Article 131 of the Constitution, the challenge has emerged in the form of Governments of constituent States of the Indian Union challenging the constitutional validity of a lawfully enacted statute by Parliament. In challenging the validity of a law that has sharply divided public and political opinion, the move throws up some interesting questions as to the invocation of such a remedy under the scheme of our federal<\/em> Constitution.<\/p>\n

Ambit of Article 131<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Article 131 is in many respects an anathema to the Government\u2019s oft-quoted catchphrase \u2018cooperative federalism\u2019<\/em>. The Constitution Framers were well aware that disputes between the Union and the constituent States is an inevitability for any federal polity and therefore provisioned for either the Government of India or a State Government to by-pass the judicial hierarchy and directly approach the Supreme Court under its original and exclusive jurisdiction. However, the remit of Article 131 is tempered on certain counts and the same assumes great significance vis-\u00e0-vis the issue at hand.<\/p>\n

A bare perusal of Article 131 manifests that (1<\/em>) exclusive jurisdiction vests in the Supreme Court of India to the exclusion of any other court, (2<\/em>) there must exist a \u2018dispute\u2019<\/em>, (3<\/em>) said dispute must be between either the Government of India i.e. the Central Government and one or more constituent State or States or between two or more of such constituent States of the Union of India, and most importantly (4<\/em>) the dispute must involve a question of law or a question of fact upon which the extent or the very existence of a legal right<\/em> is predicated. Two integral constituents of Article 131 i.e. \u2018dispute\u2019<\/em> and \u2018legal right\u2019 <\/em>must therefore be emphasised.<\/p>\n

Maintainability of the Suit<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The\u00a0 Supreme Court, vide its law settling judgments in State of Rajasthan\u00a0 <\/em>v. Union of India<\/em>[1]<\/a> \u00a0<\/em>as well as State of Jharkhand <\/em>v. State of Bihar[2]<\/strong><\/a><\/em> have authoritatively established that \u2018dispute\u2019 must involve the assertion and\/or vindication of a legal right of the Government of India and\/or that of a constituent State of the Union. A caveat in that regard is that a genuine legal right must have been asserted by way of the suit concerned and any issue merely touching upon political concerns would be outrightly rejected by the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

It becomes absolutely fundamental to take into consideration that any invocation of Article 131 must concern itself with the rights, obligations, duties, powers, immunities and liberties only insofar as the parties to the suit are concerned. The Supreme Court has further established, vide the above cited judgments, that an original suit under Article 131 must not and cannot be likened to a civil suit in terms of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and therefore in the matter at hand it is not necessary that the plaintiff States must assert the \u2018legal right\u2019 unto themselves.<\/p>\n

Evidently, Article 131 has been manifested to not<\/em> be encumbered with any such narrow expositions and a suit thereof would be maintainable so far as it brings into question any dispute centred around the legal or constitutional right asserted by the defendant Government of India not in consonance with such rights and powers asserted by the plaintiff States. However, this is precisely where the plaintiff States\u2019 suit falters for nowhere in the respective plaints, have the States of Kerala as also Rajasthan challenged or brought into question the constitutional power of the Government of India to enact the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. In fact, vide the respective plaints it has been submitted that by virtue of Article 256, the constituent States of the Union shall be constitutionally obligated and duty bound to implement the provisions of the Amendment Act, 2019 unless the Supreme Court deems it unconstitutional.<\/p>\n

It is no one\u2019s case that the validity of a Central legislation cannot be challenged by the Government of a State under Article 131. However, the same has to be tempered by way of the Constitution Bench judgment in State of Rajasthan[3]<\/strong><\/a><\/em>whereby two conditions were laid out as already exhibited hereinabove. For invoking Article 131 therefore, there has to be a dispute<\/em> between the legal\/constitutional right or authority or power asserted by the defendant vis-\u00e0-vis the plaintiff. The constitutional power of the Central Government to enact the Amendment Act, 2019 as per List I (Union List) of the VIIth<\/sup> Schedule having nowhere been challenged, the pre-requisite conditionalities under Article 131 are not satisfied.<\/p>\n

In fact, the\u00a0 Supreme Court, vide its judgment in State of Jharkhand[4]<\/strong><\/a> <\/em>\u00a0furthered the abovecited position of law and came to the conclusion that there isn\u2019t any bar to a test of constitutional validity of a statute under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. However, the same has to concern a disputed question of law\/fact that impinges, erodes, diminishes or even outrightly strips the legal right asserted by a \u2018party to the proceedings\u2019<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Notably, the plaintiff States have predicated the \u2018dispute involving questions of law and fact\u2019<\/em> on the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of their inhabitants. This is erroneous on two primary grounds; one, the Amendment Act, 2019 does not in any manner deem to take away or abridge the rights of Indian citizens for it is merely an enabling provision to speed up the grant of Indian citizenship for certain religious communities and two, the said averment is grossly dehors the constitutional scheme of our federal polity wherein the constitutional power to regulate affairs pertaining to \u2018Citizenship, naturalisation and aliens\u2019, \u2018Extradition\u2019 <\/em>and \u2018Admission into, and emigration and expulsion from, India; passports and visas\u2019,<\/em> vests with Parliament to the absolute exclusion of State Legislatures. Evidently thus, the State Governments are merely manufacturing a \u2018dispute\u2019 where none exists as per the scheme of the Constitution of India.<\/p>\n

In conclusion, the reader must be apprised of the fact that the question pertaining to invocation of jurisdiction under Article 131 insofar as it concerns a challenge to the constitutional validity of a statute has in fact been referred to a larger Bench of the Supreme Court in light of the apparent conflict between the two judgments in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Union of India<\/em>[5]<\/a> and the abovecited State of Jharkhand v. State of Bihar[6]<\/strong><\/a><\/em>. Regardless, the same doesn\u2019t alter or dilute the ambit and scope of Article 131 as laid out by State of Rajasthan[7]<\/strong><\/a> <\/em>\u00a0judgment.<\/p>\n

\n

*Authors are practising Advocates in Delhi.<\/span><\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> (1977) 3 SCC 592<\/a><\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> (2015) 2 SCC 431<\/a><\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> State of Rajasthan <\/em>v. Union of India, <\/em>(1977) 3 SCC 592<\/a><\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> State of Jharkhand <\/em>v. State of Bihar<\/em>, (2015) 2 SCC 431<\/a><\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> (2011) 12 SCC 268<\/a><\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> (2015) 2 SCC 431<\/a><\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> State of Rajasthan <\/em>v. Union of India, <\/em>(1977) 3 SCC 592<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Ivan & Vivek Mathur*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":55471,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[42503,1191],"tags":[40671,40672,2554,34169],"class_list":["post-228264","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal-analysis","category-op-ed","tag-article-131-constitution-of-india","tag-cooperative-federalism","tag-Jurisdiction","tag-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nArticle 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"by Ivan & Vivek Mathur*\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-04-14T05:30:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-07-14T15:34:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/\",\"name\":\"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-04-14T05:30:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-07-14T15:34:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists","og_description":"by Ivan & Vivek Mathur*","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-04-14T05:30:34+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-07-14T15:34:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/","name":"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg","datePublished":"2020-04-14T05:30:34+00:00","dateModified":"2020-07-14T15:34:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/04\/14\/article-131-manufacturing-a-dispute-where-none-exists\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Article 131: Manufacturing a \u2018Dispute\u2019 Where None Exists"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/SupremeCourt-of-india-e1474695737123.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":283082,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/11\/unhandicapping-the-federal-court-of-india-in-federal-disputes-critique-of-the-decision-in-state-of-m-p-v-union-of-india\/","url_meta":{"origin":228264,"position":0},"title":"(Un)Handicapping the Federal Court of India in Federal Disputes: Critique of the decision in State of M.P. v. Union of India","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by Vinayak Goel\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-372.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":276425,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/28\/maintainability-before-merit-the-prerequisite-in-states-suits-against-the-union-under-article-131\/","url_meta":{"origin":228264,"position":1},"title":"Maintainability Before Merit: The Prerequisite in States’ Suits Against the Union Under Article 131","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 28, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Rahul Agarwal\u2020 and Madhav Goel\u2020\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "OP. ED."","block_context":{"text":"OP. ED.","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Prerequisite","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-1-5.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":326266,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/10\/west-bengal-suit-alleging-misuse-of-cbi-by-union-is-maintainable-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":228264,"position":2},"title":"\u2018Establishment, extension of jurisdiction, superintendence of DSPE vests with GOI\u2019; West Bengal\u2019s suit alleging misuse of CBI by Union maintainable: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"July 10, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The State of West Bengal had challenged the CBI\u2019s action of registering Suo moto cases for offences that occurred within its territory without any direction from the competent court or prior consent by the State.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Misuse of CBI","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Misuse-of-CBI.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Misuse-of-CBI.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Misuse-of-CBI.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Misuse-of-CBI.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":292008,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/13\/sc-holds-meghalayas-suit-challenging-lotteries-regulation-act-maintainable-under-article-131-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":228264,"position":3},"title":"SC rejects Centre’s plea challenging maintainability of Meghalaya’s suit to declare provisions of Lotteries Regulation Act as ultra vires","author":"Editor","date":"May 13, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court said that the grievances raised by the State of Meghalaya in the context of its right to do business in lotteries under Article 298(b), would constitute disputes, which fall squarely within the four corners of Article 131 of the Constitution.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"suit maintainable under article 131","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/suit-maintainable-under-article-131.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/suit-maintainable-under-article-131.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/suit-maintainable-under-article-131.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/suit-maintainable-under-article-131.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":282651,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/28\/does-a-union-territory-fall-under-word-state-of-article-131-for-invoking-original-jurisdiction-of-the-supreme-court-a-legal-analysis\/","url_meta":{"origin":228264,"position":4},"title":"Does A \u201cUnion Territory\u201d Fall Under Word \u201cState\u201d of Article 131 for Invoking Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: A Legal Analysis","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by Baglekar Akash Kumar\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "OP. ED."","block_context":{"text":"OP. ED.","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-225.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":347899,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/15\/president-questions-sc-on-timelines-governor-president-powers-for-assent-under-articles-200-201\/","url_meta":{"origin":228264,"position":5},"title":"President questions SC on setting timelines on Governor and President\u2019s powers under Articles 200 & 201 for Bill Assent","author":"Editor","date":"May 15, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Invoking Article 143(1), the President of India sent a reference to the Supreme Court after its 8th April ruling that set timelines for Governors and the President to grant assent to bills passed by legislatures.","rel":"","context":"In "Legislation Updates"","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bill Assent timeline","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Bill-Assent-timeline.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Bill-Assent-timeline.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Bill-Assent-timeline.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Bill-Assent-timeline.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Bill-Assent-timeline.webp?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Bill-Assent-timeline.webp?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228264","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=228264"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228264\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/55471"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=228264"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=228264"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=228264"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}