ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 26th June. Click Here for more information.
Source- The post is based on the article “The importance of constitutional punctuality” published in “The Hindu” on 1st May 2023.
Syllabus: GS2- Issues related to federalism
Relevance– Office of governor
News– Recently, the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly passed a resolution seeking to provide for a time frame for Governors to act on Bills passed by the State Legislature.
Why does the governor withholding the bill passed by assembly is against the spirit of the constitution?
When the Constitution was adopted, some of the sovereign functions were retained for the sake of continuity in governance. There was no time limit fixed for various authorities to discharge duties.
Drafters of the Constitution assumed that nominated governors will discharge sovereign duties beyond the confines of political partisanship.
Article 200 of the Constitution limits the options before the Governor to give assent to the Bill sent by the legislature, or withhold assent, or reserve a Bill for the consideration of the President. Governors have wrongly understood this function as some discretionary responsibility.
However, a composite reading of the debates in the Constituent Assembly provides a different interpretation.
The original draft Article 175 moved for discussion provided discretion to the Governor to return the Bill.
While moving the amendment to this Article, B.R. Ambedkar said that there can be no room for a Governor acting on discretion” and recommended removing the discretion.
A simple reading of the Article is sufficient to show that the meaning of the phrase “withholds assent therefrom” has been misinterpreted to mean holding back the Bill.
What are practices followed in other countries regarding the veto of the bill?
In the United Kingdom, there has been no royal veto since 1708. In the United States, there is a time limit of 10 days for the President to give assent or veto a bill. If the President does not sign or vetoes the Bill within this time, it automatically becomes an Act.
What are the views of higher courts on authorities discharging their functions without any regard for a time limit?
The Supreme Court in Shamsher Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab (1974), held that the discretion of the Governor is extremely limited. Even in rare cases, the governor shall act in a manner that is not detrimental to the interest of the state.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Governor shall only act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.
The Supreme Court, in Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur (2020), asked the Speaker of the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly to decide on the disqualification petitions under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution within a period of four weeks.
In the case filed by the State of Telangana against the Governor, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the words in Article 200, “as soon as possible after the presentation of the Bill”, are important. Governors should necessarily bear this in mind.
