The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a direction that the inauguration of the new Parliament building should be done by the President of India and not the Prime Minister.
A bench of justices JK Maheshwari and PS Narasimha told petitioner advocate Jaya Sukin that the court understands why and how this petition was filed and it is not inclined to entertain this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.
The petition by an apex court lawyer Sukin was filed amid a controversy over the scheduled inauguration of the new Parliament building by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday. Twenty Opposition parties have decided to boycott the ceremony to protest the “sidelining” of the president.
Sukin, in petition, said under Article 79, the president is the executive head of the country, and she should have been invited. He, however, said if the court does not wish to entertain the petition, he be allowed to withdraw it.
Sukin said the President enjoys certain powers and performs a variety of ceremonial functions and by not inviting her to Sunday’s ceremony, “the inauguration of the new Parliament Building is not according (to) law”
Sukin even alleged “malpractice” behind keeping the President away from the Sunday function and stated that by not inviting her, the Lok Sabha secretariat and Central government have tried to humiliate the President.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said if the petition is allowed to be withdrawn, then it will be filed in the high court. The bench then dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
The petition said the respondents, the Lok Sabha Secretariat and the Union of India, are “humiliating” the president by not inviting her for the inauguration.