New Delhi, Nov 20: In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that timelines cannot be fixed for the Governor and the President for giving assent to bills passed by state assemblies and the judiciary cannot also grant deemed assent to them.
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai unanimously held that it would be against the interest of federalism if the Governor, without following due process under Article 200 (power of Governor to provide assent to bills passed by the assembly), is allowed to withhold bills.
The bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar said, “We don’t think governors have unfettered power to sit over bills passed by state assemblies”.
While answering the Presidential reference in which President Droupadi Murmu has sought the opinion of apex court under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution, the bench said that governors have three options — either to grant assent or send bills for reconsideration or refer them to the President.
It said in a democratic country like India, fixing timelines for governors is against elasticity provided by the Constitution.
The top court also deprecated the grant of “deemed assent” granted by the apex court on April 8 in the case of Tamil Nadu to the bills held by the state governor, saying it amounts to virtually taking over functions of constitutional authority.
The top court also ruled that the discharge of Governor’s power under Article 200 is not justiciable.
