Balancing Federalism: Supreme Court on Governor’s Role in State Legislation

Recently, Governors in Tamil Nadu and Kerala have reserved couple of bills for the President’s consideration. They have deferred action using what is known as a pocket veto. This has led to deadlock between the Governors and the respective state governments. Article 200 of the Constitution of India is related to "assent to bills". In response to this ongoing tussle, the hon’ble Supreme Court of India has issued certain guidelines to ensure prompt action by Governors under Article 200 of the Constitution of India :-

1- Even though the Constitution does not specify an exact time frame for the Governor(s) to accept, reject or reserve a Bill for the President, the phrase “as soon as possible” in Article 200 indicates that such decisions must be made without undue delay.

2- If the Governor prefers to withhold assent or reserve a Bill based on the advice of the Council of Ministers of the State, this must be done within one month time frame.

3-If the Governor opts to withhold assent against the advice of the Council of Ministers of the State , the Bill must be returned back to the legislature along with a message, within three months time limit.

4-Similarly, if the Governor reserves a Bill for the consideration of the President, against the advice of the State Cabinet, this must also be done within three months time frame.

5-In scenarios where a Bill is re-instated by the State Legislature after being returned by the Governor, the Governor must give assent

within one month time of its re-passage.

The Supreme Court also clarified that any discretion exercised by the Governor under Article 200 is subject to judicial review, ensuring accountability and preventing misuse of constitutional authority by the office of the Governor.