The Supreme Court Tuesday sought response from the Centre on Congress MP Jairam Ramesh's plea challenging the amendments made to the money laundering law, PMLA, through money bills since 2015.
A bench headed by Justice S A Bobde issued notice to the central government and sought its stand on the petition contending that the amendments effected by way of money bills were in violation of the Constitution.
The high court had in February dismissed the plea raised before it by the Congress leader, saying that he has not been able to justify the delay in the filing the petition.
Ramesh claimed that there was delay in filing the petition as he had come to know about the amendments made in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) only recently.
The Rajya Sabha MP had contended before the high court that prior to the present regime at the Centre such amendments were part of an ordinary bill.
A money bill is a piece of legislation which can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha cannot amend or reject it. The Upper House can only make recommendations which may or may not be accepted by the Lower House.
In his plea in the high court, Ramesh alleged that the amendments made to PMLA were "unconstitutional" and "illegal" as they have no relation to the money bill provisions enumerated in Article 110 of the Constitution.
"Passing the impugned amendments by way of a Money Bill is grossly illegal and is expressly ultra vires the Constitution of India. Such action bypasses the authority of the Upper House and is a desecration of bicameralism which forms an invaluable part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the petition had said.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
