UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2-issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure.
Introduction
Recent developments, particularly the Supreme Court’s response to the 16th Presidential Reference, are seen as eroding federalism, a basic feature of the Constitution. The concern is that unelected constitutional authorities may override elected State governments, threatening democratic balance.
About 16th Presidential Reference
Trigger point
- On May 13, 2025, President Droupadi Murmu referred 14 constitutional questions to the Supreme Court under Article 143.
- The reference followed the Supreme Court’s ruling in State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu (2025), where a two-judge Bench suggested finite timelines for Governors to act on Bills.
Core of the reference
Questions relate to Articles 200 and 201, concerning Governor and President’s powers over State legislation.
Issues raised include:
- Whether Governors must follow aid and advice of the State Cabinet.
• Whether timelines can be imposed for assent.
• Whether decisions are subject to judicial review.
• Can courts intervene even before a Bill becomes law?
• Can Article 142 substitute Governor/President actions?
• Does Article 361 provide absolute immunity?
The Supreme Court’s Opinion on the 16th Presidential Reference
- No time limit can be judicially imposed
- The Constitution Bench stated that courts cannot prescribe timelines for assent under Articles 200 and 201.
- It held that absence of a constitutional time limit indicates deliberate intent.
- Limited judicial intervention
- The Bench ruled that courts cannot intervene before a Bill becomes law, rejecting pre-enactment scrutiny.
- Article 142 cannot override constitutional options available to the Governor or President.
- Discretion of Governor and President upheld
- The Court noted that these powers remain unwritten and discretionary, although subject to constitutional norms.
- It did not clearly state that Governors must strictly follow advice of State governments.
Concerns Related to the Supreme Court’s Opinion
- Risk to federalism :The Constitution treats the Union and the States as equal partners, with the Centre only as “first among equals”. The concern is that, if this understanding is weakened, States may slowly turn into “shadow Union Territories”. In such a situation, they will have elected legislatures in name, but very little real autonomy in practice.
- Unelected authorities overriding democratic mandate: When Governors can delay, return or reserve Bills without any clear timelines, elected State Assemblies become effectively powerless. This arrangement allows unelected appointees to overrule or frustrate the will of the people expressed through their representatives. The piece therefore calls this situation the anti-thesis of democracy.
- Arbitrary use of power without timelines: The absence of deadlines under Article 200 allows Governors to withhold Bills indefinitely, which is similar to exercising a pocket veto. Such open-ended power goes against the principles of reasonableness, fairness and non-arbitrariness that are central to constitutional governance.
- Threat to judicial review: Judicial review is recognised as part of the basic structure of the Constitution. If actions of the Governor or President under Articles 200 and 201 are allowed to escape scrutiny, constitutional accountability is seriously weakened. The protection under Article 361 cannot be interpreted to override or dilute judicial review.
- Evidence of increasing centralisation
- There is a wider pattern of centralisation that adds to these fears. Producing States have been denied full Goods and Services Tax compensation, and cess revenues collected by the Centre are not shared with States.
- Finance Commission devolution is not fully implemented, and central schemes often force States to share up to 50% of the cost despite their limited finances.
- There are also targeted financial transfers close to elections, such as the transfer of ₹10,000 to 1.21 crore women in Bihar, and a growing use of central agencies like the Enforcement Directorate, Central Bureau of Investigation and Income-Tax Department to pressure State leaders.
- In this background, the Governor’s actions become the final tool to weaken the powers and autonomy of State governments.
Way Forward
- Reaffirm timelines to prevent misuse
- A reasonable time limit should be read into Article 200 to avoid indefinite delays.
- Earlier stance of two-judge Bench must be reconsidered to protect legislative autonomy.
- Strengthen judicial oversight
- Governor and President must not escape scrutiny; their actions should remain justiciable.
- Judiciary must uphold constitutional safeguards over procedural immunity.
- Reinforce democratic accountability
- Governor must act on aid and advice of State Cabinet, respecting the people’s mandate.
- Avoid turning constitutional offices into political instruments.
- Restore fiscal federalism
- Ensure compensation mechanisms, transparency in cess usage, and compliance with Finance Commission recommendations.
- Avoid conditional schemes that undermine State flexibility.
- Prevent concentration of power
- Limit excessive reliance on central investigative agencies against elected State governments.
- Avoid politically motivated financial transfers that distort governance.
Conclusion
Federalism, democracy and judicial review form the core of India’s constitutional identity. By allowing Governors and the President wide discretion without timelines or effective checks, the Supreme Court’s opinion risks undermining this foundation.
The result may be an imbalance where States become dependent administrative units dominated by the Union. It is essential that institutions re-evaluate this trajectory. Protecting federalism is not merely preserving constitutional design—it is protecting India’s democracy itself.
Question for practice:
Discuss how the Supreme Court’s opinion on the 16th Presidential Reference affects India’s federal structure and the balance of power between elected State governments and unelected constitutional authorities.
Source: The Hindu
