Supreme court Hears Arguments on Presidential Reference Regarding Governor’s Bill Assent Timelines
new Delhi - The Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments concerning a Presidential reference questioning its authority to impose deadlines on Governors and the President for deciding on bills passed by state legislatures.The reference, initiated by President Droupadi Murmu, stems from a previous ruling that established prescribed timelines for decision-making and affirmed judicial review of Governor’s inaction under Article 200.
President Murmu referred fourteen questions to the Court, contending that the Constitution does not empower the judiciary to prescribe such deadlines and that “deemed assent” due to delay is not constitutionally envisioned.
The Kerala and Tamil Nadu governments have opposed the reference, arguing it is not maintainable. Conversely, the Central government supports the reference, asserting that the power to act on Bills is a “high prerogative” function unsuited to judicial timelines.
During a hearing on August 28, Tamil Nadu argued that allowing Governors to withhold assent even to money bills would effectively grant them “super Chief Minister” status. This followed a submission by the Maharashtra government on August 26 suggesting Governors can deny assent to money bills.
The Court has stated its decision will not be influenced by the current or past political party in power and has expressed doubt regarding its power to establish timelines for assent. The Court also questioned what recourse exists if a Governor fails to comply with any established timelines.
