14th April 2025 (12 Topics)
1
Apr
2
Apr
3
Apr
4
Apr
5
Apr
7
Apr
8
Apr
9
Apr
10
Apr
11
Apr
12
Apr
14
Apr
15
Apr
16
Apr
A Governor’s conduct and a judgment of significance
You must be logged in to get greater insights. click here to login
Context
The Supreme Court, in State of Tamil Nadu vs Governor of Tamil Nadu & Anr., ruled that the Governor's inaction on State Bills was unconstitutional, asserting that the Governor must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers and cannot withhold assent indefinitely or refer Bills to the President without valid grounds.
CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION OF THE GOVERNOR
- Bound by Aid and Advice: Under Article 163 and 200, the Governor is a nominal head and is constitutionally bound to act on the aid and advice of the elected State government, barring specific exceptions.
- No Absolute Veto: The Court rejected the Union's argument that Article 200 allows the Governor to withhold assent indefinitely, stating that such power would violate the principle of legislative supremacy.
- Governor is Not an Independent Authority: The Governor is not an autonomous constitutional actor but a constitutional functionary constrained by democratic norms and legal mandates.
ARTICLE 200 INTERPRETATION & COURT’S FINDINGS
- Limited Options Under Article 200: The Governor may only (1) grant assent, (2) withhold and return for reconsideration, or (3) reserve the Bill for President — with no fourth option of absolute rejection.
- No Personal Discretion in General Bills: Discretionary power is limited to cases affecting High Court powers, matters under Article 31C, or Bills threatening constitutional values — not ordinary State legislation.
- Judicial Review of Governor’s Conduct: Although Article 361 protects Governors from personal liability, their official actions are open to judicial scrutiny if they undermine constitutional governance.
SUPREME COURT’S REMEDY & FEDERAL IMPLICATIONS
- Doctrine of Deemed Assent: Using Article 142, the Court ruled that the 10 Bills re-passed by Tamil Nadu Assembly are deemed to have received assent on the date they were re-submitted to the Governor.
- Checks Against Federal Overreach: The ruling reinforces India’s federal architecture by curbing arbitrary interventions by centrally-appointed Governors in State legislation.
- Upholding Representative Democracy: The judgment reiterates that the Governor must uphold the will of the elected legislature and not act as a political disruptor.
Practice Question
Q. “The role of the Governor is not to obstruct but to uphold the constitutional functioning of the State.” In light of recent judicial pronouncements, critically examine the discretionary powers of the Governor under Article 200 and their implications for federalism in India.
More Articles
Courses
Study
Notes
Home
Resources
More
