SC wonders whether it can usurp Parliament's powers

Questioning one of its own earlier directions to rein in unruly students union activites, the Supreme Court has referred to a Constitution bench a crucial question as to whether courts can frame laws, a role reserved for the legislature.

A bench of Justices Markandeya Katju and Asok Kumar Ganguly maintained that even though they too were concerned over rising prices and unemployment, courts cannot be expected to pass orders to government on such issues as they are in the exclusive domain of the legislature.

"Today, there are high prices and large-scale unemployment. These are pressing social issues. But can we pass orders on these to the government? We do not have the expertise though we are also affected by the price rise," the Bench observed on Wednesday.

"Tomorrow, we can't abolish Parliament and say we are Parliament and start legislating," the court remarked.

The bench passed the directions and made the remarks while dealing with a bunch of petitions filed by principals of various colleges in Kerala universities in which the apex court had earlier passed a series of directions to curb the menace of ragging and framed guidelines for conduct of elections to students unions bodies in colleges and universities across the country.

The bench, however, clarified it has no problem with the orders passed by the apex court vis-a-vis curbing the menace of ragging in colleges.

An apex court bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat (since retired) had in December 2005 appointed a committee headed by former Chief Election Commissioner J M Lyngdoh to frame guidelines for conduct of the elections.

It had also appointed another panel headed by former CBI Director R K Raghavan to suggest steps to end ragging.

According to the bench, though courts have the powers to appoint committees the task of implementing the recommendations should be left to the legislature.

"They should send it to the legislature or the university to frame appropriate statute. "We have great respect for Mr Lyndoh. But judges must exercise restraint. Judges should be within their limits."

"Is it for Parliament to make laws or courts to make it?" the bench said.

According to the apex court, the student’s bodies have the right to contest elections."

"The constitution recognizes the right of an individual to form unions, association and contest elections. Universities are entitled to frame their own statutes to regulate their activities.

"We are taking over the functions of the legislature. This is nothing but taking over the functions of another organisation. What is this: judges making laws? Justice Katju heading the bench had asked.

The apex court bench also regretted the practice of courts appointing advocate commissioners to investigate certain issues cropping up before it.

"Courts are appointing commissiners in several matters. See the danger. Courts have to act as judicial statemsan. It cannot give diktats," the bench said.

However, the court snubbed a counsel when he tried to submit that the apex court's directions on curbing the menance of ragging was also erroneous.

"Don't try to perpetuate lawlessness. Murders can't be allowed. You have to assist courts in maintaining the sanctity of universities," the bench snapped.