News Excerpt:

The Punjab and Kerala state governments have petitioned the Supreme Court (SC), requesting that it instruct Governors on how long they can postpone assent to bills passed by state assemblies.

About the news:

• The Punjab government said the Governor had assented to seven bills that the assembly had passed. The Governor had neither sent the bills back to the government for consideration nor he has passed the bills.
• The Kerala government also moved a special leave petition before the SC, complaining that the Governor had indefinitely delayed assent to the Bills that the state legislature had passed.

SC’s observation:

• The Governor must take action on bills before the matter goes to the apex court. Governors need to understand that they are not elected representatives of the people. Some self-reflection by Governors is necessary.
• The bills sent to the Governor for assent should be returned "as soon as possible" and not be delayed, causing Gubernatorial Procrastination and making state Legislative Assemblies wait indefinitely.
• Gubernatorial means relating to or connected with the post of Governor.
• Rameshwar Prasad and Ors v. Union Of India and Anr: The SC held that the immunity granted by Article 361(1) does not take away the court's power to examine the validity of the Governor’s action.
• Thus, if the Governor's refusal to grant assent is unconstitutional, the Court can strike it down. 
• Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix vs Dy.Speaker (2016): The SC clarified that a Governor’s discretion under Article 200 is limited to deciding whether a bill should be reserved for the President’s consideration. It emphasised that actions or inactions by the Governor regarding bill assent can be subject to judicial review.

Constitutional status:

• Article 154:

• • It states that the executive power of the State shall be vested in the Governor and shall be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate to him in accordance with this Constitution.
• Article 200:

• • It gives three options to the Governor when a bill is presented to him after a state legislative assembly (and the legislative council, wherever existent) passes it. The Governor can -
    • assent to the bill,
    • withhold assent,
    • send it back to the assembly to reconsider it or send it to the President for his/her consideration. 
  • The Governor has to assent to the bill even if the Assembly passes the bill again without accepting any of the Governor’s suggestions.
  • The Governor can refer a bill to the President if the bill encroaches upon any rights of the High Court or, in the Governor's discretion, a subject in the Concurrent list.

• Article 201:
• When a bill is reserved for the consideration of the President, s/he may assent to or withhold assent from the bill.
• The President may also direct the Governor to return the bill to the House or Houses of the Legislature of the State for reconsideration.
• Article 361:
• The Governor has complete immunity from court proceedings for any act done in the exercise of their powers.
• This provision poses a unique situation when a government may need to challenge a Governor's action of withholding assent to a Bill.
• In this case, the Governor should disclose the reason for such refusal since, being a high constitutional authority, they cannot act arbitrarily.

Powers of Governor concerning reservation of bill:

• Sitting on a bill passed by the Assembly is not an option given by the Constitution. By doing so, a Governor is acting against the constitutional direction.
• However, the Governor can reserve a bill and not grant assent in certain circumstances. This includes if the bill is -
• against the provisions of the Constitution,
• opposed to the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP),
• against the larger interest of the country,
• of grave national importance, or
• deals with compulsory acquisition of property under Article 31A of the Constitution.

Way Forward:

• The Governor's delay in giving assent to bills passed by the Assembly violates the state's constitutional obligation and hinders the functioning of the state government. 
• If the Governor persists in such behaviour, the state government can notify the President under Article 355 and seek appropriate instructions to ensure compliance with the Constitution.
• The drafters of the Constitution did not anticipate the Governors' inaction on bills under Article 200. 
• It is clear from Article 200 that a Governor cannot postpone signing a bill.
• To preserve the nation's federalism, the Supreme Court should provide a fair period of time for Governors to consider a bill enacted by the Assembly.
• Punchhi Commission (2010) recommended establishing a time limit for the Governor to decide on granting assent or reserving a bill for the President's consideration.
• The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) proposed a four-month time limit for the Governor to decide on a bill's fate. 
• It also suggested removing the Governor's power to withhold assent except in cases explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.

Prelims PYQ

Q. Consider the following statements: (UPSC 2018)

1. No criminal proceedings shall be instituted against the Governor of a State in any court during his term of office.
2. The emoluments and allowances of the Governor of a State shall not be diminished during his term of office.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Mains PYQ

Q. Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature. (UPSC 2022)

Q. Whether the Supreme Court Judgement (July 2018) can settle the political tussle between the Lt. Governor and elected government of Delhi? Examine. (UPSC 2018)