A Judicial Nudge Following Stuck Legislative Business

Paper: GS-II, Subject: Polity, Topic: Judiciary and Tribunals, Issue: Presidential Reference regarding Article 200.

Context:

Supreme Court recently heard arguments on the Presidential Reference regarding Article 200 of the Constitution (Governor’s powers in giving assent to Bills). Court fixed a timeline of three months for Governors/President to decide on Bills submitted for assent.

Constitutional Position of the Governor in Bill Assent:

• Article 200: Governor has four options when a Bill is presented after passage by the State legislature:

Issue of Discretion:

• Article 200 is silent on the timeframe giving the Governor discretion to withhold the bill.
  • Debate arises on whether Governor can act independently or only on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 163.

Judicial Interpretations

• Shamsher Singh vs State of Punjab (1974): Governor’s discretionary power under Article 200 must be exercised on aid and advice of Council of Ministers, except in rare circumstances.
• The State of Tamil Nadu vs The Governor of Tamil Nadu & Anr. (2025): Court rejected idea of absolute discretion of Governor in withholding assent or reserving Bills indefinitely.
• Sarkaria Commission: Governors must act on aid and advice of Council of Ministers in normal circumstances.

Court’s Recent Ruling

• Time limit of three months fixed for Governors/President to decide on Bills.
• Removes uncertainty over Bills being kept pending indefinitely.
• Court clarified that constitutional balance between Union and State must be maintained.

Issues with Discretionary Powers

• Legislative Deadlock: Bills passed by State Assemblies stalled indefinitely.
• Political Misuse:  Governors are accused of acting with partisan bias against State governments.
• Federal Tensions: Misuse of Article 200 undermines cooperative federalism.
• Judicial Ambiguity: Constitution does not prescribe a time limit, requiring judicial interpretation and judicial activism.

Implications of Supreme Court Intervention:

Way Forward:

• Codify Time Limits:  Amend Articles 200 & 201 in the Constitution for clarity.
• Limit Governor’s Discretion: Narrow down Governor’s interpretation to avoid political misuse.
• Strengthen Federalism: Promote healthy Union-State coordination through regular dialogue.
• Parliamentary Oversight: Establish accountability mechanisms for Governors.
• Follow Sarkaria & Punchhi Commission Recommendations which clearly define Governor’s role as constitutional, not political.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s move to fix a three-month time limit is a landmark step towards protecting legislative sovereignty and preventing misuse of gubernatorial discretion. While not eliminating all ambiguities, it marks a decisive step towards strengthening constitutional governance and cooperative federalism in India.

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-judicial-nudge-following-stuck-legislative-business/article70061587.ece

La Excellence IAS Academy, the best IAS coaching in Hyderabad, known for delivering quality content and conceptual clarity for UPSC 2025 preparation.

FOLLOW US ON:

◉ YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/@CivilsPrepTeam

◉ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LaExcellenceIAS

◉ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/laexcellenceiasacademy/

GET IN TOUCH:

Contact us at info@laex.in, https://laex.in/contact-us/

or Call us @ +91 9052 29 2929, +91 9052 99 2929, +91 9154 24 2140

OUR BRANCHES:
Head Office: H No: 1-10-225A, Beside AEVA Fertility Center, Ashok Nagar Extension, VV Giri Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad, 500020

Madhapur: Flat no: 301, survey no 58-60, Guttala begumpet Madhapur metro pillar: 1524,  Rangareddy Hyderabad, Telangana 500081

Bangalore: Plot No: 99, 2nd floor, 80 Feet Road, Beside Poorvika Mobiles, Chandra Layout, Attiguppe, Near Vijaya Nagara, Bengaluru, 560040