Today(on 26th July),The Supreme Court has asked the Centre and the secretaries to the governors of West Bengal and Kerala to respond to pleas challenging the denial of assent to bills and their referral to the President. The court’s notice comes amid disputes over legislative approval processes.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on 26th July), the Supreme Court requested responses from the Centre and the secretaries to the governors of West Bengal and Kerala concerning separate pleas from the two state governments. These pleas challenge the denial of assent to various bills and their referral for the president’s consideration.
The bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and comprising Justice JB Paridwala and Justice Manoj Misra, issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries to both governors. This decision marks a significant step in the ongoing conflict between the state governments and the governors over legislative approvals.
Kerala’s Case
Kerala’s plea, represented by senior advocate KK Venugopal, challenges Governor Arif Mohammed Khan‘s actions of keeping several bills pending for extended periods before eventually referring them to the President. The state government argues that such actions are “manifestly arbitrary” and violate Articles 14, 200, and 201 of the Indian Constitution. These articles deal with the right to equality, the Governor’s powers concerning state bills, and the President’s role in assenting to bills reserved by the Governor, respectively.
The contested bills include the University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021, and several amendments related to the Kerala Co-operative Societies and university laws. Kerala contends that none of these bills pertain to Centre-state relations and should not require presidential assent. The state government has urged the Supreme Court to declare the Governor’s and President’s actions unconstitutional, highlighting that the bills were kept pending for as long as two years, thereby disrupting the legislative process and public welfare.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Clarifies Governor’s Role in Bill Assent: Must Return Bills for Reconsideration
West Bengal’s Plea
Similarly, West Bengal, represented by senior advocates Abhishek Singhvi and Jaideep Gupta, has raised concerns about their Governor’s office referring state bills to the President whenever the matter was listed in the Supreme Court. The state’s argument mirrors that of Kerala, emphasizing that the repeated referrals to the President are unnecessary and arbitrary, impacting the state’s legislative functions.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in these matters underscores the ongoing tensions between state governments and their appointed Governors. The bench’s decision to seek responses from the Centre and the Governors’ offices indicates the seriousness of the constitutional questions raised.
“This is a highly arbitrary action, violating Article 14 of the Constitution,”
– Kerala stated in its plea, adding that the delays “subvert the federal structure” and disrupt the legislature’s functioning. The Supreme Court’s involvement aims to address these allegations and clarify the constitutional boundaries and duties of Governors in the legislative process.
