Why in News
- The Supreme Court’s five-judge Presidential Reference Bench, headed by CJI B.R. Gavai, is hearing whether timelines can be imposed on Governors and the President for deciding on Bills under Articles 200 & 201.
- Kerala and other opposition-ruled States highlighted the indefinite delay of assent to Bills by Governors, calling it unconstitutional and adversarial.
- Court observed that Governors must act as “true guides and philosophers” to State governments, ensuring a collaborative federal relationship.
Relevance: GS II (Polity – Centre–State relations, Federalism, Role of Governors, Articles 163, 200–201, Presidential Reference under Article 143, Judicial review, Constitutional morality, Sarkaria & Punchhi Commission recommendations)
Basics
- Articles 200 & 201:
- Article 200: Governor may assent, withhold assent, or reserve the Bill for President’s consideration.
- Article 201: President may assent, withhold assent, or return the Bill.
- No explicit timeline prescribed in the Constitution.
- Presidential Reference (Art. 143): Allows President to seek SC’s advisory opinion on questions of law or constitutional interpretation.
- Governor’s Role in Legislature:
- Nominal head of the State.
- Part of State Legislature (like President at the Centre).
- Expected to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers (Article 163).
- Governor’s Discretion: Limited to certain situations (e.g., hung assembly, reserving Bills for President, recommending President’s Rule).
Overview
Constitutional Dimension
- Right to legislate is with the elected legislature, not the Governor.
- Unreasonable delay violates Article 14 (fairness) and undermines parliamentary democracy.
- Indefinite pendency → undermines basic structure: federalism, democracy.
- SC in Shamsher Singh (1974): Governor must act on aid & advice except in exceptional circumstances.
Judicial Dimension
- April 2024 SC ruling: Fixed a 3-month timeline for Governors/President on Bills.
- Debate: Should SC read timelines into Articles 200 & 201 (like substantive due process into Article 21)?
- Risk: Court-imposed timelines could trigger fresh litigation (as in medical admission cases).
Federal Dimension
- Conflicts mostly in opposition-ruled States (Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab, Telangana, West Bengal).
- Seen as Governors acting as agents of the Union, undermining cooperative federalism.
- Creates perception of dyarchy (dual authority in States).
Administrative Dimension
- Indefinite delay in assent disrupts governance and welfare measures.
- Kerala cited 8 Bills pending with Governor for 7–23 months.
- Lack of timelines leads to policy paralysis and undermines public trust.
Political Dimension
- Disputes reflect the Centre–State political tussle.
- In BJP-ruled States, Bills get assented faster; opposition-ruled States face hurdles.
- Raises concerns about neutrality of Governors.
Ethical & Democratic Dimension
- Democracy demands legislative supremacy of elected representatives over unelected authorities.
- Delays harm citizens’ welfare → ethical question of accountability.
- Governor should be a constitutional statesman, not a political actor.
Comparative Perspective
- UK: Royal Assent is a formality; refusal not practiced since early 18th century.
- Canada & Australia: Governors-General largely act as rubber stamps on advice of ministers.
- India: Retains vestiges of colonial discretionary powers → need for reform.
Value Addition
- Constituent Assembly Debates: Dr. Ambedkar clarified Governor is not an independent authority, but bound by advice of ministers.
- Sarkaria Commission (1988) & Punchhi Commission (2010): Recommended limiting Governor’s discretion, ensuring neutrality, and specifying timelines.
- ARC Reports: Suggested reforms in appointment, tenure, and role of Governors to prevent misuse.
- Judgments:
- Shamsher Singh (1974) – Governor is a constitutional head, bound by aid & advice.
- Nabam Rebia (2016) – Governor cannot act as an “all-pervading super-constitutional authority”.
Way Forward
- Specify timelines: Clear constitutional/legislative mandate (e.g., 3 months).
- Governor reforms: Neutral appointments, fixed tenure, adherence to constitutional morality.
- Judicial clarity: Balanced approach → prevent misuse without judicial overreach.
- Strengthen cooperative federalism: Build trust between Centre and States.
