New Delhi:

A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said the Governor cannot reserve bills for the President after withholding assent. On February 10, after hearing the arguments for the entire day, the apex court had reserved the judgment on Tamil Nadu government's pleas over the delay in the Governor’s assent to bills, including the constitution of search-and-selection committees for the appointment of VCs in universities.

On Tuesday, Justice Pardiwala, pronouncing the judgment on behalf of the bench, citing Article 200, said the Governor is not allowed to sit on the bills and exercise a pocket veto over them. “There is no scope for the governor to declare a simpliciter withholding of assent. Meaning absolute veto is impermissible under Article 200”, said Justice Pardiwala.

The apex court said the reservation of 10 bills by the Governor for consideration by the President, after it was re-considered by the state legislative assembly, is illegal and erroneous in law, and thus liable to be set aside, and as a result any subsequent action taken by the President also does not survive.

“The bills having been pending with the Governor for a long period of time and the governor having acted not bonafide in reserving the bills for consideration of the President immediately after pronouncement of decision of this court in Punjab governor’s case, are deemed to have assented to by the governor on the day presented to him after re-consideration (by the legislative assembly)”, said Justice Pardiwala. The detailed judgment on the matter will be uploaded later in the day.

The apex court made it clear that it is not undermining the office of the governor and emphasized that the Governor must be a friend, philosopher, and guide and not driven by political considerations but the constitutional oath. The apex court said the Governor must be a catalyst and not an inhibitor.

As per Article 200 of the Constitution, the Governor is expected to take one of the three courses of action on bills - grant assent to bills, withhold assent to bills or reserve the bills for the President. The bench held that the Bill can be reserved for the President only at the first instance.

Justice Pardiwala said as a general rule, it is not open for the Governor to reserve a Bill for the President after the bills have been re-presented by the Government after being passed again by the Assembly. He added that the only exception is when the bill presented in the second round is different from the first version.

The apex court said that with view of delay by the Governor, it is left with no choice but to use its power under article 142 to state that all 10 bills have come into effect as Act when it was sent to the Governor.

“Despite there is no prescribed time limit, the Article 200 cannot be read in a manner to allow the governor to take no action on the bills, which are presented to him for assent…”, said Justice Pardiwala, and termed it essentially a roadblock in the law-making machinery.

 In a big win for the MK Stalin government in Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the decision of Governor RN Ravi to withhold assent to 10 key bills was "illegal" and "arbitrary".

Read More : 

Telangana HC Upholds NIA Court's Death Sentence To 5 Convicts