A general view of Supreme Court.
| Photo Credit: Shashi Shekhar Kashyap
The State of Kerala on Thursday (February 6, 2025) pushed for an early hearing in the Supreme Court its writ petition arguing that Governors in Opposition-ruled States have triggered an “endemic” of delaying assent or indefinitely sitting on crucial Bills passed by the Legislative Assemblies.
In an oral mentioning before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, advocate C.K. Sasi, for Kerala, said the court is currently hearing a similar petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu challenging the conduct of Governor R.N. Ravi, who sat on 10 re-enacted Bills, mostly dealing with higher education, before referring them for consideration to the President.
Chief Justice Khanna said the petition by Kerala would be listed in March.
The Kerala’s case had come up last in November 2023 before a Bench of then Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
Justice Pardiwala is currently hearing the Tamil Nadu case in a Bench comprising Justice R. Mahadevan.
In a hearing on November 20, 2023, senior advocate K.K. Venugopal, appearing for Kerala, had said eight key Bills were severally pending for eight to 23 months. The State had argued that the Governor was a part of the State Legislature under Article 168 and could not act in a way contrary to the wishes of the elected representatives of the people.
Article 168 spells out that “for every State, there shall be a Legislature which shall consist of the Governor and two Houses to be known respectively as the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly”.
The court had at the time issued notice to the Kerala Governor’s office in that hearing.
Also read | Governors can’t sit on Bills passed by Assembly: Supreme Court
In the next hearing, on November 29, 2023, it had not escaped the attention of the court that some of the Bills had since been dealt with by the Governor. The then Governor Arif Mohammad Khan had assented to one Bill and referred the remaining seven to the President for consideration.
Mr. Venugopal had however demanded in court that the Governor explain if the seven Bills referred to the President had violated Article 254 (inconsistency between central and State laws) or whether they had trenched into the Union List.
“He (Governor Khan) cannot blindly send the seven Bills to the President,” Mr. Venugopal had contended.
Chief Justice Chandrachud (now retired) had found substance in the State’s submissions, noting that the “power of the Governor cannot be used to thwart the normal process of democratic law-making by the legislature”.
Attorney General R. Venkataramani, who had appeared for the Governor’s office on November 29, had said there were both “political and non-political dimensions” and he did not want to go into it.
“But we will get into it. There needs to be accountability by the Governor,” the Chief Justice had retorted.
Mr. Venugopal had argued that constitutional authorities cannot afford to exercise power arbitrarily.
“A carte blanche cannot be given to Governors… Please step in strongly or people will suffer,” Mr. Venugopal had urged the court then.
Published – February 06, 2025 01:29 pm IST
