Q. With reference to ordinance making power of President, consider the following statements:
1. It cannot be promogulated when only one of the houses is not in session.
2. The President’s satisfaction can be questioned on the ground of malafide.
3. Successive repromulgation of same ordinance without any attempt to get the bills passed amounts to violation of the Constitution.
4. A constitutional amendment can be made through the ordinance route.
How many statements given above are correct?
Exp) Option b is the correct answer
Statement 1 is incorrect. Article 123 of the Constitution empowers the President to promulgate ordinances during the recess of Parliament. He can promulgate an ordinance only when both the Houses of Parliament are not in session or when either of the two Houses of Parliament is not in session. An ordinance can also be issued when only one House is in session because a law needs to be passed by both the Houses and not by one House alone. An ordinance made when both the Houses are in session is void.
Statement 2 is correct. In Cooper case, (1970), the Supreme Court held that the President’s satisfaction can be questioned in a court on the ground of malafide.
Statement 3 is correct. In D.C. Wadhwa case (1987) the SC ruled that successive repromulgation of ordinances with the same text without any attempt to get the bills passed by the assembly would amount to violation of the Constitution and the ordinance so repromulgated is liable to be struck down. It held that the exceptional power of law-making through ordinance cannot be used as a substitute for the legislative power of the state legislature.
Statement 4 is incorrect. An ordinance like any other legislation, can be retrospective, and may modify or repeal any act of Parliament. However, it cannot be issued to amend the Constitution.
