Kerala govt files second plea before SC against governor for withholding bills

This second appeal is a special leave petition (SLP) against the 2022 Kerala high court ruling, which rejected a petition by a Kochi-based lawyer challenging the governor’s decision to indefinitely withhold the bills passed.

Kerala November 2022 verdict

In the verdict delivered in November 2022, the Kerala high court had said that it cannot impose a time limit on the governor’s authority to give assent to bills presented for his approval.

“Under a parliamentary democracy, when the Hon’ble governor is left with discretion under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, it may not be appropriate for the courts to issue any direction to the governor of a state to exercise the discretion within a time frame to be fixed by the court,” the Kerala high court order had said.

Impaired government's functioning: SLP

Meanwhile, the Kerala government's most recent SLP said that the governor’s refusal to sign the bills has affected the administration of varsities and put them in the doldrums. The petition elaborated on how the governor’s delay in passing the bills passed by the legislature without any decision impaired the government’s functioning.

The major concerns raised by the Kerala government in the SLP are that the appointment of experts as chancellors is getting delayed and the administration is suffering. Secondly, withholding the Kerala Co-operative Societies Amendment Bill poses a roadblock to long-pending reforms to primary dairy cooperative societies, said the Kerala government.

Similiarly, not signing the Public Health Bill 2021 was hindering the state’s pursuit of becoming a role model for other states and withholding of University Laws Amendment Bill 2022 has been affecting the state’s intent to reform the bill.

SC's observation on governors

Recently, on a similar appeal from Punjab, the SC had chastised governors for failing to clear bills passed by legislatures.

”Governors should refrain from delaying decisions till state governments have petitioned the court, and they should keep in mind that they are not elected by the people,” said a bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud.

Chandrachud also observed: “There has to be a little of soul-searching by all, by the governors. Governors must act even before the matter comes to the Supreme Court. This has to come to an end when governors act only when matters reach the Supreme Court.”

The Punjab administration claimed that governor Banwarilal Purohit was causing administrative paralysis by failing to enforce seven assembly-passed laws. In Kerala's case, it is a question of eight assembly bills.

First petition

In its first petition filed before the SC, the Kerala government has claimed inaction on part of the governor in relation to eight bills passed by the state legislature and said many of these involve immense public interest, and provide for welfare measures, which would stand deprived and denied to the people of the state to the extent of the delay.

“The petitioner — State of Kerala — in fulfilment of its parens patriae obligation to its people, seeks appropriate orders from this Honourable Court in relation to the inaction on the part of the Governor of the State in relation to as many as eight bills passed by the state legislature and presented to the governor for his assent under Article 200 of the Constitution.

“Of these, three bills have remained pending with the governor for more than two years, and three more in excess of a full year. The conduct of the governor, as would presently be demonstrated, threatens to defeat and subvert the very fundamentals and basic foundations of our Constitution, including the rule of law and democratic good governance, apart from defeating the rights of the people of the State to the welfare measures sought to be implemented through the Bills,” the plea filed by the Kerala government stated.

The plea said Article 200 of the Constitution casts a solemn duty on the governor of a state by requiring that on the presentation to him of any Bbll passed by the state legislature, he “shall declare either that he assents to the Bill or that he withholds assent therefrom or that he reserves the Bill for the consideration of the President”.

Grave injustice

The state government said grave injustice is being done to the people of the state, as also to its representative democratic institutions by the Governor, by keeping bills pending for long periods of time, including three bills for longer than two years.

“The governor appears to be of the view that granting assent or otherwise dealing with bills is a matter entrusted to him in his absolute discretion, to decide whenever he pleases. This is a complete subversion of the Constitution,” it submitted.

Governor's rejoinder

Meanwhile, Kerala governor who has left for a week-long visit to Rajasthan, told reporters that he would sign the pending bills only if Chief Minister Vijayan met him personally and explained their rationale.

Khan also did not want to comment on SC’s oral observations in the Punjab case. “That is merely an observation, not a conclusion. So I’m not going to say anything,” he said.

Khan had long maintained that the chief minister was abdicating his constitutional duty to brief him on state concerns.

Chief Minister Vijayan, meanwhile, has likened Khan’s “disobedience of the people’s will” to that of provincial Governors during the colonial era, who had vast discretionary powers.