The Centre on Thursday defended incorporating, in the Finance Act 2017, the provision for bringing uniformity in the service conditions, appointments and tenure of members of 19 tribunals, asserting that the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision certifying a bill as a money bill can't be challenged before the top court.
Telling the court not to venture into the area that it is barred under the principle of separation of powers, Attorney General K.K. Venugopal told the five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi that if something was perceived to be wrong, it was not for the court to step in but for members of parliament to protest.
He said if courts think they "alone are the saviour of something that they think to be wrong", they be trespassing somewhere they can't enter, Venugopal told the bench also comprising Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Sanjiv Khanna.
If there was something wrong, he said, that "members of parliament are empowered to protest. They can bring a no-confidence motion against the Speaker which is uncomfortable. It can't be that the things can be set right by the court's interference."
He said that the belief that with court's intervention, everything can be set right is not justified.
The Attorney General was responding to the submission by senior counsel Arvind Datar, contesting the incorporation for the restructuring and re-organization including the appointment, removal and the service conditions of the members of 19 tribunals in the Finance Act, 2017 and the Lok Sabha Speaker certifying it as a money bill.
Datar appeared for the petitioner, the Madras Bar Association.
Venugopal also said that there could be no selective and restricted challenge to a part of the Finance Act 2017.
"If there is a challenge, let it be on the entire Act. Finance Act touches on myriad laws dealing with every aspect of governance," he said.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)