[Answered] “The discretion of the Governor does not contemplate an indefinite withholding of assent to a Bill. Such an action would cause a breakdown of the constitutional machinery.” Discuss the potential consequences of a Governor indefinitely withholding assent to a Bill.

Recently there were issues between the Governor and Chief Minister regarding the passing of bills. The friction between the two is not healthy for parliamentary democracy. The Governor along with State Assembly is part of the State Legislature but he can act only on the “advice” of his Council of Ministers, with the Chief Minister as the head of the Council. The discretionary power of the Governor under Article 163(2) is significant for his decision can’t be challenged in any court. Article 200 provides for the consent of the governor concerning bills passed by the state legislature. The discretionary power of withholding the bill for an indefinite period is not in harmony with parliamentary democracy.

What are the potential consequences of a Governor indefinitely withholding assent to a Bill?

• Multiple power centers: Governor is only the ceremonial head while CM is the de facto head. The withholding of assent to bills by the Governor undermines the CM authority which is answerable to the people.
• Effects on Cabinet responsibility: A politically active Governor would lead to usurpation of the power of elected representatives which will have disastrous consequences for our constitutional machinery.
• Violates Constitution: In the Nabam Rebia case, the Supreme Court held that the Governor exercise discretion only in those matters in which the Constitution expressly permits it to do so, His discretion concerning bills is related only to reserving the bill for consideration of the President or not.
• Governance in State: The Governor’s inaction on the bills creates a situation where the state is unable to function according to the constitution which affects the governance of the state.
• Dispute between Centre and State: The withholding of bills by the Governor may lead to a tussle between the state Government and central government which is not healthy for the principle of cooperative federalism.

Way Forward:

• Appointment of Governor: Governor should not be from a political background. Election of the Governor through a panel comprising the PM, Home Minister, Lok Sabha Speaker, and the CM.
• Fixed Tenure: The tenure of the Governor should be fixed for 5 years as suggested by the Sarkaria Commission.
• Impeachment: Recommendations have also been made for a provision to impeach the Governor by the Assembly.

Conclusion:

The principles of Constitutional morality should take precedence rather than power politics in the governance of the state. Framers of the constitution intended that actual governance should be done by the PM, CM & President, and Governor should act only on the advice of the Council of Ministers.