Dear Students, New Batches for IAS and MPPSC starting from May 2nd week 2024, Offline Batches -(Special Discount–3 Months Course with Study Material worth Rs. 27500/- Absolutely Free for Admission before 20th May 2024).Online Batches - FLAT 50% Discount for 1st 100 Admissions . Join Now

Governor cannot refer re enacted Bills to President

Governor cannot refer re-enacted Bills to President

 

Governor cannot refer re-enacted Bills to the President

Why in News

      The Tamil Nadu government in the Supreme Court has criticised Governor R.N. Ravi for exhibiting “constitutional obstinacy” by referring ten key Bills re-enacted by the State Assembly to the President for consideration.

Recent Supreme Court’s Views:a

A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India said that the Governor, having withheld his assent to the Bills in the first instance and cannot now refer the Bills, re-passed by the Tamil Nadu legislature, to the President.

•     As mentioned by SC, Article 200 of the Constitution gives the Governor three choices –

•     Grant assents to the Bills or withhold assent or reserve them for the consideration of the President.

•     In this case, the Governor withheld assent.

•     Once he has withheld assent, there is no question of him referring them to the President.

•     The CJI has said that the Governor withholds assent, he cannot stultify the Bills.

What is the observation of Supreme Court?

•     It Laid down the law that a Governor, in case he withholds assent, should send back a Bill forwarded to him by a State Legislature “as soon as possible” with a message to reconsider the proposed law.

•     The expression “as soon as possible” conveyed a “constitutional imperative of expedition”.

•     In case, the State Assembly reiterates the Bill “with or without amendments”, the Governor has no choice or discretion, and has to give his assent to it.

•     Message of the Governor does not bind the legislature is evident from the use of the expression ‘if the Bill is passed again …with or without amendments.

•     A Governor who chooses to withhold a Bill without doing anything further would be acting in contravention of the Constitution. Because such a course of action would be contrary to fundamental principles of a constitutional democracy based on a Parliamentary pattern.

•     The verdict is also a significant boost to Tamil Nadu’s case. The Tamil Nadu Assembly had returned 10 crucial Bills to Governor R.N. Ravi without any amendments. The Governor had withheld assent to the Bills in the first instance.

-----------------------------------------------