Article 143 of the Indian Constitution grants the President the power to consult the Supreme Court. According to Order XLII, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules (2013), upon receiving a reference from the President of India, the Registrar notifies the Attorney General of India to appear before the court and receive directions regarding whom the notice should be sent.

Order XLII, Rule 4 specifies that the Supreme Court must report to the President after conducting a hearing as it deems appropriate. Each report should align with the opinion delivered in open court, with the concurrence of the majority of judges present, allowing any dissenting judge to express their opinion.

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 143 is advisory or consultative in nature. This article confers a specific jurisdiction solely upon the Supreme Court. The questions referred for the Supreme Court's opinion need not necessarily arise from any pending case or dispute before the court. The primary duty and function of the Supreme Court under Article 143 is to consider the question posed by the President's reference and provide its opinion to the President.

The Supreme Court is bound by the terms of the reference. It cannot inquire into the truth or facts presented in the reference, nor can it delve into questions of bona fides or other matters. The court's advisory jurisdiction under Article 143(1) is well-established.

Considering the nature of this advisory jurisdiction, references should be construed narrowly rather than broadly, as emphasized in the case of Kerala Education Bill (1957).

Despite any perceived inexpediency, the Constituent Assembly enacted Article 143, and it is not within the Supreme Court's purview to decline answering a reference based on general considerations. Notably, in Special Reference No. 1 (2002) involving Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam and the Gujarat Legislative Assembly, the court upheld its duty to provide an opinion.