Supreme Court junks plea on new Parliament building inauguration by President Droupadi Murmu

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to consider a PIL for issuing a direction that the new Parliament building should be inaugurated on May 28 by the President of India and not by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

A bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and P S Narasimha allowed the petitioner, advocate C R Jaya Sukin, to withdraw his plea after he failed to convince the court.

The petitioner contended that since the President is the head of Parliament she should be allowed inaugurate the building. He cited several Articles of the Constitution, highlighting the role and functions of the President.

Also read: Differences between the new Parliament building and the existing one

The court, however, asked him as to how those constitutional provisions were related to inauguration of the building.

Several Opposition parties have decided to boycott the programme on the issue of the President not being allowed to inaugurate the building.

In his plea, advocate Sukin, claimed that the Lok Sabha Secretariat violated the Constitution by not inviting the President for the inauguration of the new building.

The plea said President is the first citizen of India and head of the institution of Parliament. Indian Parliament consists of the President and the two Houses of the apex legislature, the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha.

"All important decisions regarding the country are taken in the name of Indian President, though most of these are on advice given by Council of Ministers (CoM), as per Article 74 of Indian Constitution," his plea said.

He contended that the statement issued by the Lok Sabha Secretariat on May 18 and invites by Secretary General, Lok Sabha for the inauguration of the new Parliament building was arbitrary and without proper perusal of the records and without application of mind.