PIL in Supreme Court seeks direction for inauguration of new Parliament Building by President Droupadi Murmu

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, May 25

Ahead of the May 28 inauguration of the new Parliament Building by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on May 28, a PIL in the Supreme Court on Thursday sought a direction for its inauguration by President Droupadi Murmu.

Petitioner CR Jaya Sukin—who hails from Kanyakumari district of Tamil Nadu—alleged that the Lok Sabha Secretariat violated the Constitution by not inviting the President for the inauguration.

“Further Article 87 says that at the beginning of every Parliament session, the President shall address both Houses and inform Parliament of the causes of its summons. But the respondents (Lok Sabha secretariat and Union of India) are trying to ‘humiliate’ the President. The President of India Droupadi Murmu is not being invited to the inauguration of the new Parliament building”, it submitted.

Sukin contended that the May 18 statement issued by the Lok Sabha secretariat and invites issued by the Lok Sabha Secretary General about inauguration of the new Parliament Building went against the Constitution.

According to the Constitution, Parliament consists of the President of India and its two Houses—the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha, the petitioner submitted.

Highlighting that the President is the first citizen of India and head of the institution of Parliament, Sukin sought a direction that the president inaugurate the new Parliament Building.

The petitioner said the decision not to invite the President was “illegal, Arbitrary, high-handed, whimsical and unfair, abuse of Authority and against the principles of Natural Justice.”

Prime Minister Modi is scheduled to inaugurate the new Parliament Building on May 28 following an invitation by the Lok Sabha Speaker.

Around 20 opposition parties have announced that they would boycott the inauguration of the new Parliament building and decided to boycott the inauguration ceremony.

The BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) has termed the opposition stand a “blatant affront to democratic ethos and constitutional values of our great nation”.