'Slap on Govt's Wrist': Chidambaram Hails Minority View in Demonetisation Ruling

Justice BV Nagarathna, in her dissenting judgment, had said that the centre's 2016 move was unlawful.

File image of former Finance Minister P Chidambaram.

(Photo: Altered by The Quint)

Senior Advocate and former Union Minister P Chidambaram, who appeared for some of the petitioners in the demonetisation case, hailed the dissenting view in the verdict and said on Monday, 2 January:

"We are happy that the minority judgment (on demonetisation) has pointed out the illegality and the irregularities in the Demonetisation. It may be only a slap on the wrist of the government, but a welcome slap on the wrist."

Supreme Court's Demonetisation verdict: Earlier in the day, four out of a five-judge bench had upheld the demonetisation exercise initiated by the Central Government as valid and said that it cannot be struck down.

The minority view: Justice BV Nagarathana, however, had dissented.

But, as in such cases, which are adjudicated by an odd number bench, the majority view prevailed.

Justice Nagrathana, differing with others on the bench said:

"The action of demonetisation initiated by the Central Govt as per 8 November, 2016 notification is unlawful."

She added:

"Demonetisation of all series of notes at the instance of Central Government is a far more serious issue than the demonetisation of particular series by the bank. So, it has to be done through legislation."

It is this view, that Chidambaram appreciated in his tweet and said:

"We are happy that the minority judgment has emphasised the important role of Parliament in a democracy. The minority judgment brings out the profound distinction between the plenary legislative power of Parliament and the limited power of the executive Government."

Commenting on the majority view, which upheld the Centre's 2016 move he said:

"It is necessary to point out that the majority has not upheld the wisdom of the decision; nor has the majority concluded that the stated objectives were achieved. In fact, the majority has steered clear of the question whether the objectives were achieved at all."