SG: The president of India, being bound solely by a body outside the constitution of India may perhaps not be the correct interpretation of our constitution. Constitution of J&K is beyond and outside our constitution.
AG: Can a body like the Constituent Assembly of J&K have a final say on Art 370? It is not a constituent body of parliament of India. It doesn't have all attributes and powers
AG: It's still only a recommendation. The necessity of having a recommendation doesn't add any further content to the role of recommendation.
CJI: In 370, the recommendation is a condition precedent and condition in terms of time. The recommendation has to be before the abrogation by president. Thus, to say that this recommendation is just an opinion and not binding...
CJI: In Art 117, the same word 'recommendation' is used but here recommendation is mandatory. You can't move the bill except on recommendation of president.
CJI: Now see Art 117. It says that a money bill cannot be introduced except on a recommendation of president.
CJI: Those recommendations aren't binding on the lok sabha. It may either accept them or accept them in part, or reject them. That's what Art 109(2) it says recommendation of Rajya sabha doesn't bind lok sabha.
CJI: I'll give examples of 'recommendation' being used in Constitution- Art 109, 117. 109 deals with money bills. A money bill is not introduced in Rajya sabha, always introduced in lok sabha. After the bill is passed in Lok Sabha, it's sent to Rajya sabha for recommendation.
CJI: The hues of the word 'recommendation' is not by itself dispositive of the content of the expression as to whether it is merely and advice or condition precedent.
AG: Recommendation is not binding on the president. Therefore, it is recommendation. It is not concurrence.