SG: there judgments cited in TN judgment for justiciability-first Bommai-there the Court came to a conclusion that there are judicially manageable standards- it was in respect of Article 356.

Second judgment cited is Manipur Tribunal-Speaker is a Tribunal, he is amenable to judicial review. There is no dispute.

Another judgment is Perrivalam- if we can have judicial review of functions of President, why not here? But the case was about pardoning and not a political question.

These three judgments leads to no conclusion that it is justiciable. Hoesct judgment holds the field, that is my submission.