Supreme Court: Governors Must Act Promptly on Bills

Quick Summary

• Three judges of the supreme Court’s Presidential Reference Bench, alongside Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, observed that Governors cannot delay State Bills indefinitely without assent.
• Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justices Vikram nath and P.S. Narasimha stated that prolonged gubernatorial delays obstruct the Constitution’s functioning.
• Senior advocates A.M. Singhvi (Tamil Nadu) and Kapil Sibal (West Bengal) argued that Governors must act promptly on Bills,stressing collaboration between constitutional offices.
• Countering the Centre’s stance, Mr. Sibal termed indefinite delays an “absurdity” under Article 200 (Governor’s power to assent),warning against such unfettered power.
• The case follows a two-judge SC ruling setting a three-month limit for Presidents or Governors to decide on pending State Bills before “deemed” approval applies-a judgment debated in the current hearing.
• Judges expressed doubts about prescribing “general” time limits without specific consideration of differing Bill timelines or legislative processes.

Read more

Indian Opinion Analysis

The debate highlights a crucial friction point within India’s federal structure: balancing accountability and discretion in gubernatorial roles. While indefinite delays risk undermining State legislatures’ authority, codifying rigid timelines may oversimplify varied legislative contexts across States.Collaborative governance grounded in constitutional principles remains vital to prevent unnecessary tension between different arms of government.

Resolving this issue will have long-term implications for clarity in executive-legislative interactions-notably in reducing politically motivated impediments to democratic processes. However, any solutions must safeguard both institutional independence and national unity by respecting diverse practical needs.