While considering the Kerala government’s petition on Governor Arif Mohammed Khan prolonging assent to the bills sent to him, the Supreme Court on Friday, November 24, suggested Khan to refer to its judgment in the Punjab Governor case, which elaborates on the powers and duties of a Governor with regard to bills sent by the state Assembly.
"Our order in the Punjab matter was uploaded last night. Ask the Governor’s Secretary to look into the order," the SC bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud told Attorney General R Venkataramani.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on November 29, as a detailed hearing was impossible due to paucity of time. In Friday’s short hearing, senior advocate KK Venugopal, representing the Kerala government, told the apex court that Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has met the Governor several times to resolve this issue. "All the Ministers have met him (Governor). And the Chief Minister has met him many times," he said.
According to the petition filed by the Kerala government, as many as eight bills were presented to the Governor for his assent, and of these, "three have been pending for more than two years, and three more in excess of a full year".
Venugopal had said that Governors should realise that they are a part of the state legislature under Article 168 of the Constitution, citing that as many as eight bills are pending assent with Governor Arif Khan for a period ranging between seven to 23 months. He added that the Governor also continues to sit on three bills that were earlier promulgated as ordinances under his signature.
The petition also said that by keeping bills pending for such long periods, the Governor is in direct violation of the Constitution. The writ petition further said that the words "as soon as possible" occurring in Article 200 of the Constitution necessarily mean that not only should pending bills be disposed of within a reasonable time, but that these bills have to be dealt with urgently and expeditiously without any avoidable delay.
The petition also underlined that the Governor's alleged inaction defeats people’s right to access the welfare measures sought to be implemented by the pending bills. "The conduct of the Governor, as would presently be demonstrated, threatens to defeat and subvert the very fundamentals and basic foundations of our Constitution, including the rule of law and democratic good governance," the petition read.
In its order in the said Punjab Governor’s case, the apex court said that since the Governor is an unelected head of state, he cannot prevent a law from being made by state legislatures. On November 23 evening, the judgment was uploaded to the SC website.
The court was considering the case filed by the Punjab government, aggrieved by the inaction of the Governor on bills sent to him that were already passed in Vidhan Sabha. The Governor alleged that Vidhan Sabha sessions where the bills were passed were unlawful. He also delayed many bills claiming there was a need for legal opinion on them.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra said in their judgement dated November 10, “The Legislative Assembly comprises duly elected Members of the legislature. During the tenure of the Assembly, the House is governed by the decisions which are taken by the Speaker in matters of adjournment and prorogation. We are, therefore, of the view that the Governor of Punjab must now proceed to take a decision on the Bills which have been submitted for assent on the basis that the sitting of the House which was conducted on 19 June 2023, 20 June 2023 and 20 October 2023 was constitutionally valid.”
The apex court also said that the Governor should act according to the provisions of Article 200 in the Indian Constitution, which mandates that “as soon as possible, after the presentation to the Governor of the Bill for assent he may return a Bill…”