Hindu Editorial Analysis : 20-November-2023
The recent expression of displeasure by the Supreme Court regarding delays in the assent to Bills by Governors in Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Punjab, and Kerala highlights a significant issue in the legislative process.
Governor’s Power:
Article 200 of the Constitution outlines four alternatives available to a Governor when presented with a Bill for assent. These options include giving assent, withholding assent, returning the Bill for reconsideration, or reserving it for the President’s consideration.
Matter of ‘Discretion’:
Contrary to the term ‘discretion,’ the Supreme Court has clarified that Governors do not exercise discretionary powers while withholding assent or returning a Bill. They are obligated to act as per the advice of the Council of Ministers, as stated in the Shamsher Singh case (1974).
Withholding Assent Scenario:
The situation of ‘withholding assent’ may arise in the case of a Private Members’ Bill, but this is uncommon due to the majority control of the council of ministers in the Legislative Assembly.
Governor’s Discretion:
Governors may exercise discretion in reserving Bills that reduce High Court powers or conflict with Union laws. However, this is rare, and Governors must normally follow ministerial advice.
Issues & Challenges:
- Overruling Ministerial Advice:
- Governors, despite ministerial advice, have historically exercised discretion in returning Bills.
- The Constitution expects prompt decisions on returning Bills, as emphasized by the Supreme Court.
- No Constitutional Provisions in Disagreements:
- Lack of constitutional provisions for public engagement when there is a disagreement between the Governor and the state.
- Governors withholding Bills indefinitely without communication is constitutionally impermissible.
Committee Recommendations:
- Sarkaria Commission (1987):
- Discretionary power is limited to rare cases of unconstitutionality.
- Recommended a six-month period for the President to dispose of reserved Bills.
- Punchhi Commission (2010):
- Recommended Governors decide on Bills within six months, but recommendations remain unimplemented.
Why In News
The Supreme Court has recently expressed displeasure on delays for action on Bills presented for assent to Governors of Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Punjab, and Kerala, emphasizing the critical need for timely decision-making to uphold the democratic process and serve the best interests of the public.
MCQs about Constitutional Quandaries: Governor’s Assent Challenges Unveiled
-
What are the four alternatives available to a Governor when presented with a Bill for assent, according to Article 200 of the Constitution?
A. Give assent, withhold assent, return for reconsideration, and reserve for President’s consideration
B. Approve, veto, amend, and reserve
C. Pass, reject, amend, and delay
D. Withhold, reject, reconsider, and enact
-
In the case of ‘withholding assent,’ when is it likely to occur according to the essay?
A. When the Council of Ministers desires the Bill to become law
B. When a Private Members’ Bill is passed against the wishes of the council of ministers
C. When the incumbent government resigns
D. When the Legislative Assembly has a minority government
-
According to the Supreme Court, when should a Governor make a decision on returning a Bill for reconsideration?
A. Within one month
B. As soon as possible
C. After consulting the President
D. Within six months
-
What do the Sarkaria Commission’s recommendations imply about the Governor’s discretionary power?
A. Governors have unlimited discretionary power
B. Discretionary power is common in all cases
C. Discretionary power is limited to rare cases of unconstitutionality
D. Governors should always act against ministerial advice
Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions
