SC sets aside TN Governor’s decision to reserve 10 bills for President
In a major victory to the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government, the Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared 10 bills which were stalled and reserved by Governor R N Ravi for the President’s consideration, and also set a timeline for all Governors to act on the bills passed by state assemblies. A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan held, “Action of the Governor to reserve the 10 bills for President is illegal and arbitrary and thus the action is set aside.” The court added, “The 10 bills shall be deemed to be cleared from the date it was re-presented to the Governor.”
In the first of its kind directions, the top court fixed a timeline within which the Governor has to act on bills passed by the state legislature. The apex court said there was no expressly specified time limit for the discharge of functions by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution. “Despite there being no prescribed time limits, Article 200 cannot be read in a manner which allows the Governor to not take action on the bills, which are presented to him for assent and thereby delay, and essentially roadblock law-making machinery in the state,” it said.
The apex court has set a timeline ranging from a month to three months for the governors to decide the fate of the bills cleared by the state assemblies. Fixing the timeline, the bench said in case of withholding assent on a bill and reserving it for the President with the aid and advice of the council of ministers, the maximum period would be one month. In case the Governor decided to withhold assent without the aid and advice of the council of ministers, the bills must be returned to the assembly within three months, it added.
The apex court said in case of presentation of a bill after reconsideration by the State Assembly, the bills have to be given assent by the Governor within a period of one month. The bench cautioned that any failure to comply with the timeline would make the inaction of the Governor subject to judicial review by the courts. The top court exercised its plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to make the bill represented to the Tamil Nadu Governor, as deemed to have been passed.
The Bench said the Governor must be conscious to not create “roadblocks or chokehold” the state legislature in order “to thwart and break the will of the people”. “The members of State Legislature, having been elected by the people of the state as an outcome of the democratic expression, are better attuned to ensure the well being of the people of the state,” the bench said. Under Article 200 of the Constitution, the bench said, the Governor did not possess any discretion and had to mandatorily act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers.
Article 200 of the Constitution empowers the Governor to give assent to bills presented to him, withhold the assent, or to reserve it for the consideration of the President. The bench said Governor couldn’t sit over bills and adopt the concept of “absolute veto” or “pocket veto“. “Pocket veto” denotes a concept where Governor sits over the bills without signing it and virtually making it ineffective.
The bench said the Governor, sitting over bills passed by the Assembly and presented to him, without any action, made them just a “piece of paper” and “skeleton without flesh“.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
VERY GOOD. Will the SC bind itself with the same standards and do away with the concept of “absolute veto” or “pocket veto“. “Pocket veto”
Supreme court to give powers to Governor to reject a bill for “n” th time and no law should be confine him when resubmitted for 3rd time, he should pass.
Then only supreme court judgement is valid, else it is another toilet paper
SC should set right its house first to deliver judgements within 30 days and then only should preach others.
Supreme court is no longer supreme, it is very ordinary even corrupt court of worst kind.