Governor's Power on Bills: SC Weighs in on Constitutional Obligations

Strategic Insights -

The Centre has argued that the governor's action on a bill passed by an assembly, such as withholding assent, returning it, or reserving it for the President's consideration, is non-justiciable. This means the Supreme Court cannot examine the validity of the governor's decision. The Centre has maintained that resolving the impasse between governors and states should be done through the political mechanism rather than in the Supreme Court. The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, emphasized that the court does not have the wherewithal to examine the validity of the governor's considerations while making a decision. This has led to the Supreme Court questioning whether it should remain passive if a governor fails to discharge their constitutional obligations.

Key Takeaways:

  • The Centre has argued that the governor's action on a bill passed by an assembly is non-justiciable, meaning the Supreme Court cannot examine the validity of the decision.
  • The Centre has maintained that the impasse between governors and states should be resolved through the political mechanism rather than in the Supreme Court.
  • Solicitor General Tushar Mehta emphasized that the court does not have the wherewithal to examine the validity of the governor's considerations while making a decision.
  • The Supreme Court has questioned whether it should remain passive if a governor fails to discharge their constitutional obligations.
  • The court has also emphasized the need for judicial restraint, advocating for the separation of powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary.
  • The Centre has pointed out that India follows the principle of constitutional supremacy, where the three organs of governance operate independently in their respective core constitutional functions.
  • The Centre has argued that the silence of the Constitution on the deadline for a governor to take a call on legislations was deliberate and cannot be tinkered with by the Supreme Court.

Statistics:

  • There are hundreds of aspects that a governor examines while deciding on a bill.
  • The government has argued that the Supreme Court does not have the wherewithal to examine the validity of the governor's considerations while making a decision.
  • The National Judicial Appointments Commission was unanimously passed by Parliament and ratified by two-thirds of the state, only to be struck down by the Supreme Court.
  • The Centre has emphasized the need for resolving political issues through a collaborative exercise between the different branches of governance.

Sources:

  • The Times of India
  • The Supreme Court of India

Note: The article does not mention the dates of the hearings or the court proceedings. Therefore, no dates have been included in the summary or the key takeaways. The sources listed are the exact format mentioned in the original article.