{"id":59615,"date":"2025-11-21T19:13:03","date_gmt":"2025-11-21T13:43:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/?p=59615"},"modified":"2025-11-21T19:13:16","modified_gmt":"2025-11-21T13:43:16","slug":"sc-on-president-governor-timelines","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/21-11-2025\/sc-on-president-governor-timelines","title":{"rendered":"SC States it cannot Impose Timelines on President and Governors"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Syllabus: GS2\/Polity and Governance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Supreme Court held that<strong> it cannot impose any timelines for decisions<\/strong> of the <strong>President and the governor<\/strong> on granting assent to Bills under<strong> Articles 200\/201 of the constitution.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Background<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Recently, the Supreme Court verdict <strong>laid down a timeline for the President and governors to decide on state bills.<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Reason: The Governor is not bound by any time limit to act on a Bill.<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This creates a situation where the Governor can simply not act on a Bill indefinitely this is referred to as a<strong> &#8220;Pocket Veto&#8221;<\/strong>, although the term is not officially used in the Constitution.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Supreme Court ruled that <strong>Governors cannot delay or withhold assent to Bills indefinitely <\/strong>once they are passed or re-passed by the state Assembly.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The ruling set a timeline for the Governor to act on Bills:<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>One month for re-passed Bills.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Three months if the Bill is withheld contrary to Cabinet advice.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It raises questions about the<strong> scope of judicial authority under Article 142,<\/strong> and whether the<strong> courts can enforce accountability on constitutional functionaries like Governors and the President.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>SC Clarification<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Imposition of Timelines: <\/strong>The SC held that in the <strong>absence of constitutionally prescribed time limits,<\/strong> and the manner of exercise of power by the governor, it would not be appropriate for this Court to <strong>judicially prescribe timelines<\/strong> for the exercise of powers under Article 200.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Action on Laws not Bills: <\/strong>The bench concluded that actions of the President or governor with respect to a bill <strong>cannot be agitated before the court;<\/strong> and that any action before the court or for judicial review will lie <strong>only when the bill becomes law.\u00a0<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Reaffirmation of constitutional boundaries: <\/strong>The judgment emphasizes that each constitutional authority must act within its sphere.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Prolonged Delay: <\/strong>In cases of prolonged delay, the top court said that the courts can issue a limited direction to the governor to decide on a bill.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The court clarified that the President and Governors cannot resort to <strong>\u201cprolonged and evasive inaction<\/strong>\u201d by sitting endlessly on State Bills awaiting their approval.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This would amount to a deliberate attempt to thwart the people\u2019s will expressed through the proposed welfare laws passed by State legislatures.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>What is Article 142?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Article 142 of the Indian constitution <\/strong>is a provision that empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>It also makes such decree or order enforceable throughout the territory of India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The importance of Article 142 lies in the following aspects:<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>It enables the Supreme Court to <strong>exercise executive and legislative functions in certain situations,<\/strong> such as issuing guidelines, directions, or orders to the government or other authorities.\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It allows the Supreme Court to <strong>intervene in matters of public interest, human rights, constitutional values, or fundamental rights<\/strong>, and to protect them from any violation or infringement.\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It enhances the Supreme Court&#8217;s role as the<strong> guardian of the constitution and the final arbiter of the law.\u00a0<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Criticism: <\/strong>It may encroach upon the <strong>principle of separation of powers <\/strong>and the domain of the executive and the legislature, and may <strong>invite criticism of judicial overreach or activism.\u00a0<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>How are the Bills Passed by the Governor?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Article 200 of the Indian Constitution<\/strong> stipulates that when a Bill passed by a State Legislature is presented to the Governor, the Governor has four options:\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Assent to the Bill, making it law.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Withhold assent, effectively rejecting the Bill.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Return the Bill to the Legislature for reconsideration (except Money Bills).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Reserve the Bill for the President\u2019s consideration if the Governor deems it necessary, such as in cases affecting constitutional matters or the powers of the High Court.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>If the Bill is returned and the Legislature passes it again (with or without amendments), the Governor must assent to the Bill and cannot withhold assent.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Article 201<\/strong> provides that when a Bill is reserved by the Governor for the President\u2019s consideration, the President can:\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Assent to the Bill, making it law.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Withhold assent, rejecting the Bill.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Return the Bill (if not a Money Bill) to the Legislature with a message for reconsideration.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Concerns of the States<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Interference in State Autonomy: <\/strong>States argue that the Governor\u2019s role in reserving bills for the President undermines the autonomy of state legislatures, especially when the bills are in the State List.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Misuse of Discretion: <\/strong>There are concerns that Governors reserve bills contrary to the advice of the State Council of Ministers, leading to misuse of discretionary powers.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Delays in Decision-Making: <\/strong>Many states complain of delays in the President\u2019s decision on reserved bills, which affects the timely enactment of laws.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Lack of Clear Guidelines: <\/strong>States suggest that there should be clear guidelines for the Governor and Union Government to prevent arbitrary use of discretion.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Impact on Federalism: <\/strong>Some states believe that Articles 200 and 201, which allow the Governor to reserve bills, are inconsistent with the true federal structure of India.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In essence, this development is not merely a legal inquiry but a crucial test of India\u2019s federal structure, with implications for the <strong>balance of power between the Centre and the States, judicial oversight, and constitutional morality.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Source: <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/opinion\/columns\/bihar-shows-old-opposition-getting-eased-out-new-opposition-not-in-sight-10377111\/?ref=infinite\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><strong>IE<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Context<\/strong><\/p>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">The Supreme Court held that it cannot impose any timelines for decisions of the President and the governor on granting assent to Bills under Articles 200\/201 of the constitution.<\/li>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><strong>Background<\/strong><\/p>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Recently, the Supreme Court verdict laid down a timeline for the President and governors to decide on state bills.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">Reason: The Governor is not bound by any time limit to act on a Bill.<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">This creates a situation where the Governor can simply not act on a Bill indefinitely this is referred to as a &#8220;Pocket Veto&#8221;, although the term is not officially used in the Constitution.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li class=\"ms-5\">The Supreme Court ruled that Governors cannot delay or withhold assent to Bills indefinitely once they are passed or re-passed by the state Assembly.<\/li>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/current-affairs\/21-11-2025\/sc-on-president-governor-timelines\" class=\"btn btn-primary btn-sm float-end\">Read\u00a0More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-59615","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-current-affairs"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59615","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=59615"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59615\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59662,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59615\/revisions\/59662"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59615"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59615"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59615"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}