Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea seeking to declare that citizens have a fundamental right to directly petition the Parliament.

When the case came up for hearing today, CJI Chandrachud questioned the prayers made in the petition and said, "How can such sort of a prayer be sought?".

"Go to your local MP and talk to him, you cannot seek a right to petition the parliament directly", the CJI added.

Moreover, Justice Narasimha who was also a part of the bench told the petitioner that such committees were already there in the parliament.

"Relief sought falls squarely within parliamentary domain and such directions cannot be passed under Article 32.", observed the bench while dismissing the petition.

On January 31, the Supreme Court bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna had agreed to hear the petition, while refraining from issuing notice in the plea.

Court had then added that it wanted to hear what the Centre had to say on the practical aspects and the existing system.

The present plea sought to have a system with a regulatory framework that would empower citizens to petition the Parliament of India to have debates, discussions and deliberations on issues and concerns raised by citizens.

The said framework, if implemented, will ensure that the grievances of citizens can be addressed in a proper manner by Parliament, the plea submitted.

It has been further submitted that the current system does not fully allow citizens to initiate discussions in Parliament by moving appropriate petitions.

When the matter was heard last, Court was told that after a citizen casts his vote, he/she doesn’t have any mode to engage with the lawmakers.

To this, the bench had said that given the massive difference in the population in India and other countries where such a system works, it may not be practical.

The court had further questioned the petitioner that when under the present process, a citizen could directly petition the Lok Sabha, was it the petitioner's case that such a system was ineffective?

Case Title: Karan Garg vs. UoI And Ors.