PIL demanding President to inaugurate new Parliament House rejected, SC said – we cannot interfere

The Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking a direction to the government to inaugurate the new Parliament House from the President. Let us inform that a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in this regard in the Supreme Court on Thursday. The Supreme Court said that under Article 32 we cannot hear the matter. We cannot interfere in this matter. The Supreme Court bench also said that we know why you file such petitions, we are not inclined to consider it. The bench further said that you are lucky that we are not imposing fine on you.

Supreme Court declines the PIL seeking a direction that the new Parliament building should be inaugurated by President Droupadi Murmu on 28th May. https://t.co/Cu8Z35TRza

— ANI (@ANI) May 26, 2023

The petition was heard by a bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice PS Narasimha. The petition, filed by Supreme Court lawyer CR Jaya Sukin, said that by not including the President in the inauguration, the central government has violated the Constitution of India.

Said in the petition – it is unfair not to call the President

The petition argued that the central government did not invite the President to the inauguration ceremony, which is unfair. The petition states that the President is an integral part of the Parliament. Why was the President kept away from the foundation stone laying ceremony? Now the President is not invited to the inauguration ceremony. This decision of the government is not appropriate. Explain that 20 opposition parties including Congress, TMC, AAP, AIMIM and JD(U) said that they will boycott the inauguration of the new Parliament House on May 28.