Home About Us
About Jigyasa IAS Mission & Vision Director’s Message
UPSC CSE
About Civil Services Examination Eligibility Criteria for CSE CSE Exam Pattern How to prepare for CSE How to choose optional subject
Courses
GS Foundation Course Sociology Optional Courses Guided Preparation Module Daily Rigorous Answer Writing
Daily Feeds
Daily Current Affairs Editorials Daily Quiz Free Answer Writing
Useful Links
About Prelims About Mains About Interview Daily Study Guideline Essential Book List
Downloads
NCERT Book List Govt. Welfare Schemes Daily Downloads
Contact Us
Blog Login

The Editorial 06 Oct, 2022 - "Gubernatorial Procrastination is Unreasonable"

INDIAN POLITY LAW STATE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
06 Oct, 2022

NEWS HIGHLIGHTS

Theme :  Polity & Governance

GS - 2

TABLE OF CONTENT

  1. Context

  2. Constitutional Provisions related to Governor

  3. Renowned SC Cases & Recommendations 

  4. What is the Process in other Countries regarding Assent?

  5. What happened in Kerala & T.N ?

  6. Time period to give or withhold assent

  7. Article-200

  8. Road Ahead

Context: The Governor being a part of the State legislature, the process of law making is complete only when he signs it, signifying his assent.

Constitutional Provisions related to Governor: 

  • The appointment and powers of government can be derived from Part VI of the Indian constitution. Article 153 says that there shall be a Governor for each State. One person can be appointed as Governor for two or more States.

  • The governor acts in 'Dual Capacity' as the Constitutional head of the state and as the representative.

  • He is part of the federal system of Indian polity and acts as a bridge between union and state governments.

  • Article 157 and Article 158 of the Constitution of India specify eligibility requirements for the post of governor. They are as follows:

  • A governor must:

    1. Be a citizen of India.

    2.  Be at least 35 years of age.

    3.  Not be a member of either house of the parliament or house of the state legislature.

    4.  Not hold any office of profit.

  • The term of governor's office is normally 5 years but it can be terminated earlier by:

    1. Dismissal by the president on the advice of the council of ministers headed by the Prime minister of the country.

    2.  Dismissal of governors without a valid reason is not permitted. However, it is the duty of the President to dismiss a governor whose acts are upheld by courts as unconstitutional and malafide.

    3.  Resignation by the governor.

Renowned SC Cases & Recommendations:

  • The Supreme Court in the Nabam Rebia judgment (2016) ruled that the exercise of Governor’s discretion Article 163 is limited and his choice of action should not be arbitrary or fanciful. It must be a choice dictated by reason, actuated by good faith and tempered by caution.

  • The Administrative Reforms Commission (1968) recommended that the report of the governor regarding the president's rule has to be objective and also the governor should exercise his own judgment in this regard.

  • The Rajamannar Committee (1971) recommended the deletion of Articles 356 and 357 from the constitution of India. The necessary provisions for safeguards against arbitrary action of the ruling party at the Center under Article 356 should be incorporated in the constitution.

  • The Rajamannar Committee emphasized that the governor of the state should not consider himself as an agent of the center but play his role as the constitutional head of the State.

  • The Sarkaria Commission (1988) recommended that Article 356 should be used in very rare cases when it becomes unavoidable to restore the breakdown of constitutional machinery in the State.

  • The commission recommended that before taking action under Article 356, a warning should be issued to the state government that it is not functioning according to the constitution.

  • "Justice V.Chelliah Commission" (2002) recommended that Article 356 must be used sparingly and only as a remedy of the last resort after exhausting all actions under Articles 256, 257 and 355.

  • The "Punchhi commission" recommended that these Articles 355 & 356 be amended. It sought to protect the interests of the States by trying to curb their misuse by the Center.

What is the Process in other Countries regarding Assent?

  • In the United Kingdom, royal assent is necessary for a Bill to be passed by Parliament to become law and the crown has the power to withhold assent. But it is a dead letter. By practice and usage there is no power of veto exercised by the crown in England now. Moreover, refusal of royal assent on the ground that the monarchy strongly disapproves of the Bill or that the Bill is very controversial is treated as unconstitutional.

  • In the United States, the President is empowered by the Constitution to refuse assent and return a Bill to the House but if the Houses again pass it with two thirds of each House the Bill becomes law.

  • The lesson to be drawn from these practices is that refusal of assent is a practice which is not followed in other democratic countries. And in some contexts, it is unconstitutional or the Constitution itself provides a remedy so that the Bill passed by the legislature could become law even after the refusal of assent.

  • The Indian Constitution, however, does not provide any such remedy. The courts too have more or less accepted the position that if the Governor withholds assent, the Bill ends. Thus, the whole legislative exercise will become fruitless. It does not square with the best practices in old and mature democracies.

What happened in Kerala & T.N ?

  • In Tamil Nadu, the Governor forwarded the Bill for exemption from the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) to the President after considerable delay, while in Kerala, the Governor publicly announced that he would not give assent to the Lokayukta Amendment Bill and the Kerala University Amendment Bill.

  • Such actions by Governors throw the legislative programmes of governments out of gear because of the uncertainty surrounding the assent. Therefore, the question of whether a Governor is permitted by the Constitution to cause uncertainty in the matter of giving assent to the Bills passed by State legislatures assumes great importance.

Time period to give or withhold assent:

  • It is claimed that since the Constitution does not fix any timeline for the Governor to decide the question of assent, he can wait for any length of time without doing anything.

  • This is illogical and militates against the constitutional scheme in respect of law making by the legislatures. Not fixing any time line does not and cannot mean that the Governor can indefinitely sit on the Bill that has been passed by an Assembly. Article 200 does not contain such an option. The Governor is required to exercise one of the options mentioned in that Article.

Article- 200:

  • Article 200 of the Indian Constitution deals with the powers of the Governor with regard to assent given to bills passed by the State legislature and other powers of the Governor such as reserving the bill for the President's consideration.

Road Ahead:

  • Governors must act as per the spirit of the Constitutional framework and values, instead of using the legal loopholes to act contrary to popular mandate.

  • If the grounds for refusal disclose mala fide or extraneous considerations or ultra vires, the Governor’s action of refusal could be struck down as unconstitutional. This point has been settled by a Constitution bench of the Supreme Court in Rameshwar Prasad case.

FAQs:

Q1. What is Article - 200?

Answer- Article 200 of the Indian Constitution deals with the powers of the Governor with regard to assent given to bills passed by the State legislature      and other powers of the Governor such as reserving the bill for the President's consideration.

Q2. What did the Sarkaria Commission recommend?

Answer- The Sarkaria Commission (1988) recommended that Article 356 should be used in very rare cases when it becomes unavoidable to restore the breakdown of constitutional machinery in the State.