New Delhi, October 12: The Supreme Court announced its intention to issue a unified directive pertaining to various nine-judge and seven-judge bench cases, encompassing matters related to money bills and the authority of the Speaker to disqualify MLAs, in order to prepare them for hearings.
A seven-judge bench, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, convened to consider six seven-judge and four nine-judge bench cases. Among these, one seven-judge case involves the review of the 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment regarding the Speaker’s authority in the disqualification of MLAs, which was delivered by a five-judge Constitution bench.
The Chief Justice stated, “The idea is to get these matters ready for hearing. We will pass a common order in all these matters in terms of the circular of August 22, 2023, which stipulates that the compilation of pleadings, documents, and precedents must all be filed within a three-week period.”
The bench further stated, “We will appoint nodal counsel in every matter who will then prepare a common compilation.” The bench also urged the advocates involved in these cases to provide the names of nodal counsel for each case.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing some of these matters, requested the bench to provide hearing dates in advance so that lawyers could prepare accordingly. The Chief Justice indicated that he would review the bench’s calendar for this purpose.
The bench also suggested that the lawyers estimate the time required for each case. Many of these cases have been pending for 20 years, the bench noted.
Regarding the matter concerning money bills, Sibal asked the bench to consider prioritizing it, citing it as a “live issue.” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Center, suggested leaving the priority decision to the bench, emphasizing that it should not be influenced by “political exigencies.” The bench concurred, stating, “Leave it to us.”
In the Nabam Rebia judgment, a five-judge Constitution bench had determined that the speaker or deputy speaker of the house is disqualified from deciding pleas for disqualification of lawmakers if there are pre-existing complaints against them.
On October 6, the Supreme Court had announced its intention to form a seven-judge bench to assess the validity of the passage of laws, such as the Aadhaar Act, as money bills. This issue arises from disputes surrounding money bills, as the government had presented bills like the Aadhaar Bill and amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) as money bills to bypass the Rajya Sabha, where it lacked a majority.
A money bill can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha, and the Rajya Sabha can make recommendations that may or may not be accepted by the lower house. In November 2019, a five-judge bench had referred the issue of examining the validity of the passage of the Finance Act, 2017 as a money bill to a larger bench, stating, “The issue and question of Money Bill, as defined under Article 110(1) of the Constitution, and certification accorded by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha in respect of Part-XIV of the Finance Act, 2017 is referred to a larger Bench.”
