Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
New Delhi, Nov 20 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Thursday said the Governor cannot indefinitely withhold his assent to bills passed by state legislatures as the Constitution provides only three “clear options”, i.e. either give assent, return the bill to the Assembly with comments, or send it to the President.
A Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai, responding to a presidential reference made under Article 143, said that though the Governor enjoys limited discretion under Article 200, that discretion is limited to the options mentioned in the Constitution.
A five-judge bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar, said, “We hold that the Governor does not have the power to impose a stay easily.”
The top court clarified that “he has three clear options to either assent, return the bill to the legislature with comments, or send it to the President. He has a discretion in choosing any one of these three options.”
It added that the discretion thus vested “cannot permit them to put the Bills on hold forever”.
The bench led by CJI Gavai said the constitutional framework puts the elected government in the “driver’s seat”.
Rejecting the Centre’s argument, the apex court said, “It is the elected government, the Cabinet, which should be in the driver’s seat and there cannot be two centers of executive power.” The apex court rejected the Centre’s argument that Article 200 provides unrestricted discretion to the Governor.
Noting that the Council of Ministers is unlikely to advise the Governor to return a Bill or reserve it for the President, the Supreme Court said that “it would be unimaginable to hold that the Governor does not have the power of discretion under Article 200”.
It states that the President “shall be unable to exercise this option unless the Governor reserves the right to assent to the Bill”.
The opinion came in response to a reference by the President seeking clarity on the timelines for the assent of the Governor and the President, after a 2-judge bench of the Supreme Court in the Tamil Nadu Bills case declared Governor RN Ravi’s prolonged inaction on 10 bills as “illegal and arbitrary” and set a three-month time limit for the assent of the President and the Governor to bills passed for the second time by the Legislature.
In July, the Constitution Bench had issued notices to all states in the case titled “Assent, withholding or reservation of Bills by the Governor and President of India”.
Earlier, in April 2025, Justices JB Pardiwala and R. A bench of Mahadevan used its extraordinary powers under Article 142 to set a three-month time limit for the President’s decisions on reserved bills, effectively bringing the President’s actions under judicial review.
–IANS
PDS/DPB