DMPQ: Do you think ordinance is a source of concern and it should be removed from our constitution? (Polity)

Article 123 of the constitution grants power to President to promulgate ordinance if he/she feels conditions are necessary for a law, provided the parliament is not in session.

 

SO it is a extraordinary power which shall be utilised in rare situation. The concerns raised against the ordinance is that its frequent use and repromulgation of ordinance. It has been seen as a tool to bypass the parliamentary procedures. So it is anti to the tenets of representative democracy and disturb the separation of power.

Above concerns are valid to a certain extent but cannot be the substantive grounds for removal of ordinance provisions because:

  1. Constitution itself provides a check on its misuse. An ordinance has to be laid in the parliament after 6 weeks of its assembly. Hence ordinance can remain for 6months and 6 weeks maximum.
  2. Constitutional amendment cannot be done via ordinance.
  3. In AK roy vs Union Of India (1982), the court argued that president ordinance making power is subjected to judicial review.
  4. In D C Wadhwa vs state of Bihar, the SC held that courts could strike down re-promulgated ordinance. Same judgement was passed recently in the case of Krishna Kumar Vs state of Bihar case.

 

CGPCS Notes brings Prelims and Mains programs for CGPCS Prelims and CGPCS Mains Exam preparation. Various Programs initiated by CGPCS Notes are as follows:- [carousel-horizontal-posts-content-slider]

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of