NEW DELHI, Nov 24: The Supreme Court declared that Governors cannot keep bills pending indefinitely without any action, asserting that the unelected Head of the State is bestowed with constitutional powers but must not use them to impede the legislative process. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, highlighted that unchecked discretion given to the Governor could obstruct the functioning of a duly elected legislature, contradicting fundamental principles of a constitutional democracy based on a Parliamentary pattern of governance.
The court, in its November 10 judgment, emphasized that if the Governor decides to withhold assent under Article 200, the logical course is to remit the bill to the state legislature for reconsideration, as indicated in the first proviso. It underscored the inseparable nature of federalism and democracy, vital components of the basic structure, and emphasized that any harm to one feature endangers the other.
In response to a plea by the Punjab Government, the Supreme Court directed Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit to decide on the bills passed during the “constitutionally valid” session held on June 19 and 20. The judgment, delivered on November 10 and uploaded on Thursday night, addressed the AAP government’s allegation that the governor was not granting assent to four bills. The court affirmed the validity of the assembly sessions, stating that any attempt to cast doubt on them poses grave perils to democracy. The court clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on how the governor will exercise his jurisdiction on the bills in question.
The ongoing feud between Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit and the AAP government led by Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann revolves around the approval of bills passed during the June 19-20 session. Purohit approved two bills but has yet to grant assent to four others, labeling the extended session as “patently illegal.”
