.jpg)
Discussion with SC judges on 'One Nation, One Election' bill cancelled; decision taken after opposition criticism?
Delhi: P.P. Chaudhary, Chairman of the 'One Nation, One Election' panel, stated on Monday that the Supreme Court had initially scheduled an informal discussion with members of the parliamentary committee examining the bill on simultaneous elections. However, the Supreme Court later deemed it inappropriate, and the meeting was cancelled.
He indicated that this decision appeared to have been taken after some opposition MPs criticized the proposed meeting. Defending the proposal, Chaudhary noted that there are precedents for parliamentary committees holding discussions with Supreme Court judges, given their specialized knowledge and expertise regarding constitutional matters.
Sources revealed that the idea of ??meeting Supreme Court judges was first proposed by DMK MP and senior advocate P. Wilson. An informal discussion regarding this had taken place within the committee before the move to consult the Supreme Court was initiated.
The meeting had been scheduled for October 6. However, last week, the Supreme Court's Secretary General informed the committee that the meeting had been cancelled. The Secretary General stated, "Senior Supreme Court judges are of the opinion that the proposed amendment could become a subject of judicial review by the Supreme Court. Therefore, discussing this matter at an administrative level would not be appropriate. Consequently, the proposed meeting has been cancelled."
Delhi: P.P. Chaudhary, Chairman of the 'One Nation, One Election' panel, stated on Monday that the Supreme Court had initially scheduled an informal discussion with members of the parliamentary committee examining the bill on simultaneous elections. However, the Supreme Court later deemed it inappropriate, and the meeting was cancelled.
He indicated that this decision appeared to have been taken after some opposition MPs criticized the proposed meeting. Defending the proposal, Chaudhary noted that there are precedents for parliamentary committees holding discussions with Supreme Court judges, given their specialized knowledge and expertise regarding constitutional matters.
Sources revealed that the idea of ??meeting Supreme Court judges was first proposed by DMK MP and senior advocate P. Wilson. An informal discussion regarding this had taken place within the committee before the move to consult the Supreme Court was initiated.
The meeting had been scheduled for October 6. However, last week, the Supreme Court's Secretary General informed the committee that the meeting had been cancelled. The Secretary General stated, "Senior Supreme Court judges are of the opinion that the proposed amendment could become a subject of judicial review by the Supreme Court. Therefore, discussing this matter at an administrative level would not be appropriate. Consequently, the proposed meeting has been cancelled."
He indicated that this decision appeared to have been taken after some opposition MPs criticized the proposed meeting. Defending the proposal, Chaudhary noted that there are precedents for parliamentary committees holding discussions with Supreme Court judges, given their specialized knowledge and expertise regarding constitutional matters.
Sources revealed that the idea of ??meeting Supreme Court judges was first proposed by DMK MP and senior advocate P. Wilson. An informal discussion regarding this had taken place within the committee before the move to consult the Supreme Court was initiated.
The meeting had been scheduled for October 6. However, last week, the Supreme Court's Secretary General informed the committee that the meeting had been cancelled. The Secretary General stated, "Senior Supreme Court judges are of the opinion that the proposed amendment could become a subject of judicial review by the Supreme Court. Therefore, discussing this matter at an administrative level would not be appropriate. Consequently, the proposed meeting has been cancelled."
