Repromulgation of Ordinances in India
Repromulgation of Ordinances in India
1. Introduction
Ordinances are temporary laws promulgated by the President or a Governor when the Parliament or the State Legislature is not in session.
This power is granted under Article 123 (President) and Article 213 (Governor) of the Indian Constitution.
Ordinances enable the executive to act swiftly in urgent situations.
However, Ordinances are temporary and must be approved by the legislature within 6 weeks of its reassembly, or they lapse.
2. Meaning of Repromulgation
Repromulgation means promulgating the same Ordinance again after it has lapsed without getting it approved by the legislature.
Essentially, it is the practice where the executive reissues the same Ordinance repeatedly instead of presenting it before the legislature for approval.
This raises constitutional and democratic concerns because it circumvents legislative scrutiny.
3. Constitutional Provisions
Article 123(2) (President) and Article 213(2) (Governor) state:
An Ordinance shall have the same force and effect as a law passed by the legislature but shall cease to operate at the expiration of six weeks from the reassembly of the legislature unless approved by it.
The Constitution does not expressly prohibit or allow repromulgation, but the spirit of the provisions implies that Ordinances should be temporary and not a substitute for legislation.
4. Concerns and Issues
Repromulgation undermines the constitutional scheme of checks and balances.
It allows the executive to bypass the legislature repeatedly, compromising democratic accountability.
Can be misused to avoid debates, opposition, and scrutiny.
It raises questions on separation of powers and the rule of law.
5. Landmark Case Law
D.C.Wadhwa v. State of Bihar (1987)
The Supreme Court criticized the indiscriminate use of Ordinances but did not expressly rule on repromulgation.
Emphasized that Ordinances are extraordinary measures, not a substitute for the lawmaking process.
Dr. Raghunath Rai v. Union of India (1989)
The Court reiterated that Ordinances are a temporary measure.
The legislature must have the power to scrutinize and approve laws.
Dilip Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1996)
The Supreme Court struck down an Ordinance that was re-promulgated multiple times without legislative approval.
Held that repeated repromulgation violates the Constitution’s scheme.
Stressed that Ordinances cannot be used as an instrument to bypass the legislature.
Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar (2017) — The Landmark Judgment on Repromulgation
The Supreme Court gave the most authoritative ruling on the practice of repromulgation.
Facts: The Bihar government repromulgated the same Ordinance multiple times without placing it before the legislature.
Key observations of the Court:
Re-promulgation of Ordinances without placing them before the legislature is unconstitutional and violates Articles 123 and 213.
Such practice defeats the purpose of the Constitution, which envisages legislative approval.
Re-promulgation is an abuse of power and undermines democracy.
Court struck down the Ordinances and directed that they cannot be reissued without legislative approval.
The Court held that Ordinances can only be promulgated in exceptional circumstances and cannot be repeatedly issued to bypass the legislature.
6. Summary of the Doctrine
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| What is Repromulgation? | Reissuing the same Ordinance repeatedly without legislature approval |
| Constitutional Status | No express prohibition, but inconsistent with Articles 123 and 213 |
| Legality | Held unconstitutional if done to bypass legislature |
| Purpose of Ordinance | Temporary urgent legislation until legislature convenes |
| Judicial Stance | Repromulgation violates separation of powers and democratic principles |
7. Practical Impact
After the Krishna Kumar Singh judgment, the executive is restrained from abusing Ordinance powers.
Ensures legislative oversight and accountability.
Protects separation of powers by preventing executive overreach.
Strengthens constitutional democracy.
8. Conclusion
The repromulgation of Ordinances is a serious constitutional issue in India. While the Constitution provides the executive the power to promulgate Ordinances in emergencies, this power is limited and temporary. The practice of repeatedly repromulgating the same Ordinance without legislative approval is unconstitutional and undermines the democratic process. The Supreme Court, especially in the Krishna Kumar Singh case, has firmly established that Ordinance-making is an extraordinary power, subject to strict limitations to preserve the Constitution's balance between the legislature and the executive.
RELATED Blog
0 comments