Governors cannot Indefinitely hold back Bills, The Hindu Editorial Analysis
The Hindu Editorial Analysis: The Editorial Analysis of The Hindu Newspaper Editorial Articles aimed at simplifying various concepts relevant to the UPSC and other State PSC Exams. The Editorial Analysis helps in expanding the knowledge base as well as framing better quality mains answers. Today’s Hindu Editorial Analysis of ‘Governors cannot Indefinitely hold back Bills’ discusses the role of governor in deciding on the legislations passed by the state legislature and how long he could avoid signing the concerned legislation.
In recent times, conflicts have emerged in several States between Chief Ministers and Governors regarding the approval of Bills. Chief Ministers express concern that Governors have been delaying their assent to Bills beyond a reasonable timeframe. This situation poses a challenge for parliamentary democracies, where the public elects a government to enact laws that represent their collective aspirations. When an elected government faces obstacles in the legislative process, it can potentially undermine the functioning of parliamentary democracy.
The State Legislature consists of the Governor, the Legislative Assembly (if the State has a single House), and the Legislative Council (if the State has two Houses).
There are specific situations in which a Governor can exercise discretionary powers separate from the Council of Ministers. The presence or absence of such discretion holds significance because, according to Article 163(2) of the Constitution, decisions made by the Governor in these matters are immune from challenge. In the case of Shamsher Singh v State of Punjab (1974), the Supreme Court established that a President or Governor can exercise discretion independent of their Ministers only if the Constitution explicitly allows them to do so.
According to Article 200 of the Constitution, when a Bill is presented to the Governor, they have three options: To provide their assent, Withhold it, or Return the Bill with certain suggestions.
The discretion granted to the Governor does not allow for an indefinite withholding of assent to a Bill, as it would lead to a breakdown of the constitutional framework. The extent to which the Governor’s autonomy is acknowledged under the Constitution can be observed through various judgments rendered by the Supreme Court.
In the case of Purushothaman Nambudiri v State of Kerala, the Supreme Court deliberated on whether a Bill awaiting the Governor’s assent would become invalid upon the dissolution of the House. After examining the provisions of Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution, the Court concluded that the Bill would not lapse. The Court emphasized that unlike the six-month timeframe given to the House for deliberating on the Governor’s or President’s recommendations, there is no specific time limit prescribed for the Governor or President to provide their assent. This implies that the framers of the Constitution did not intend for a Bill pending the Governor’s assent to be at risk of lapsing in the event of House dissolution.
While the Constitution does not explicitly specify a time limit, the first proviso of Article 200 does indicate that the Governor should either provide assent or return the Bill to the House promptly. In the case of Shamsher Singh, the Supreme Court determined, albeit indirectly, that it is only in relation to the second proviso that the Governor exercises discretion independent of the Council of Ministers.
In the case of Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix vs Dy. Speaker, the Supreme Court determined that under Article 200, the Governor exercises discretion solely in deciding whether a Bill should be reserved for the President’s consideration or not.
The Governor does not possess the authority to indefinitely withhold assent to a Bill. Upon receiving a Bill, the Governor is required to either return it with recommendations or provide assent promptly. In cases where a Bill diminishes the power of the High Court, the Governor has the discretion to refer it for the President’s consideration. Failure to act on a Bill would be a violation of the Constitution, and the Governor’s actions or inactions in this matter would be subject to judicial review.
The Telangana State Public Service Commission (TSPSC) is set to announce the TSPSC Group 1…
Census of India 2011— The 15th Indian Census, conducted in 2011, comprised two main phases: house…
Union Public Service Commission released the UPSC CMS Notification 2024 on 10th April 2024 on…
The highly reputed exam of India "UPSC" is conducted every year to recruit for the…
UPSC Mains DAF 2024 Out: The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) has issued the Detailed…
The Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (UKPSC) has released the latest UKPSC Syllabus for Preliminary and…