Brief Context
Context Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, observed that Governors must act as “true guides and philosophers” to State governments. Supreme Court observation Governor’s role: The CJI emphasized that Governors are part of the legislature and share responsibility for ensuring governance functions smoothly.
Source Content
Syllabus: GS2/ Polity and Governance
Context
- Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, observed that Governors must act as “true guides and philosophers” to State governments.
Supreme Court observation
- Governor’s role: The CJI emphasized that Governors are part of the legislature and share responsibility for ensuring governance functions smoothly.
- Impact on democracy: Prolonged inaction on Bills undermines the mandate of elected legislatures and disturbs the balance of federalism.
Constitutional Framework of Governor’s Assent to Bills
- Article 200: It outlines the Governor’s role in the assent process. When a bill is presented to the Governor after being passed by the State Legislature, they have four options;
- Grant Assent: The Governor may approve the bill, making it a law.
- Withhold Assent: The Governor may reject the bill, effectively stopping it from becoming law.
- Return the Bill for Reconsideration: The Governor can send the bill back to the legislature with suggestions. However, if the legislature passes the bill again without modifications, the Governor is bound to give assent.
- Reserve the Bill for Presidential Assent: If the bill is contrary to the Constitution, affects the powers of the High Court, or contradicts central laws, the Governor may reserve it for the President’s decision.
- Article 201: If a bill is reserved for the president’s consideration, the President has two options;
- Give Assent: The bill becomes law.
- Withhold Assent or Direct Reconsideration: The President may send the bill back to the State Legislature for reconsideration. If the Legislature re-passes the bill, the President is not bound to give assent.
What are the concerns?
- Current ambiguity: Both provisions use the phrase “as soon as possible”, which has led to delays in several Opposition-ruled States.
- Delays in Bill Assent: Kerala submitted that eight Bills had been pending with its Governor for 7 to 23 months.
- Similar complaints were raised by Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Punjab, and West Bengal.
- Instances of prolonged delays and the use of the ‘pocket veto’ (withholding assent without returning the bill) have raised concerns about the Governor’s impartiality and adherence to constitutional norms.
| Judicial Interventions – Shamsher Singh Case (1974): The Supreme Court ruled that the Governor must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers in most cases. – Rameshwar Prasad Case (2006): The court held that a Governor’s refusal to give assent can be challenged in court and overturned if found unconstitutional. – Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker Case (2016): Affirmed that the Governor’s discretionary powers are subject to judicial review, preventing arbitrary decision-making. – Punjab Case (2023): Governor is an unelected authority and cannot stall the legislative process. 1. Withholding assent requires following constitutional procedures. – Supreme Court Observation (2024): The Governor’s role is primarily ceremonial, and he should not obstruct the governance of an elected state government. |
Way Ahead
- Strengthening cooperative federalism: Institutional mechanisms, such as regular consultation between Governors and State governments, could reduce friction.
- Revisiting Sarkaria and Punchhi Commission recommendations: Both commissions stressed the need for Governors to act impartially and within constitutional limits.
Source: TH