The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, has expressed concern over the recurring theme of Governors acting on bills only after state governments are compelled to seek judicial intervention. This observation came during a hearing of a plea by the Punjab government, which pointed out that Governor Banwarilal Purohit had kept seven bills pending, including those crucial for fiscal management and amendments to the GST.
CJI Chandrachud remarked,
“This happened in the case of Telangana also. Why do parties have to come to the SC? The Governors must act before it comes to the SC… Only after they come to the SC, that the Governors start acting. This has to stop.”
The bench, which also included Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, scheduled the next hearing for November 10, seeking an update on the Governor’s actions.
Also read – Supreme Court Queries Tamil Nadu’s Bypass Of High Court In RSS March Case (lawchakra.in)
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, representing the Punjab government, argued that the Governor’s inaction on the bills, which also included legislation on Gurudwara management, had hampered governance. He pointed out that the assembly was only prorogued, which allows the Speaker to reconvene it, and that the Governor’s assent to a bill is mandatory under Article 200.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing Governor Purohit, acknowledged that the Governor had taken “appropriate decisions” on the bills and agreed to inform the court of the specifics by Friday. He also concurred with Singhvi on the unusual constitutional occurrences, such as keeping the Assembly alive without proroguing or adjourning, which he described as “astonishing” and
“never happened in the history of Indian democracy.”
The CJI called for
“a little bit of soul searching”
by both Chief Ministers and Governors, emphasizing the need for them to act responsibly within their constitutional roles. The court’s stance reflects a push for a more proactive and less litigious approach to governance, where the constitutional duties of elected officials and appointed governors are carried out without the need for judicial prompting.
The case, titled “The State Of Punjab v Principal Secretary To The Governor Of Punjab And Anr. W.P.(C) No. 1224/2023,” is set to continue as the judiciary seeks to ensure that the constitutional mechanisms function smoothly without undue delay or politicization.
