NEW DELHI: Kerala govt on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that governors must play a collaborative role with state govts on bills passed by legislatures, and said they must follow the nuanced yet non-confrontationist approach of Arif Mohd Khan - the present governor of Bihar who was Kerala governor from Sept 2019 to Jan 2025.
For the Pinarayi Vijayan-headed Kerala govt, nonagenarian and acclaimed senior advocate K K Venugopal remembered the amiable tenure of Khan, and said, "The practice followed in Kerala has been that the governor sends for the minister concerned, who had moved the bill in the assembly, to discuss with him his concerns about the contents of the bill."
"After discussion with the minister, the governor, if satisfied, would grant assent, but in the alternative may decide to send the bill back to the legislature with suggestions for amendment. If, on the other hand, there is no agreement on either of these two counts, the governor would indicate that he intends to withhold assent." Venugopal asked why of the 28 states and three UTs with legislatures, only five states are repeatedly coming to SC being aggrieved by the governor's attempt to stall bills by sitting on them indefinitely. That is because governors in all other states have adopted a collaborative approach towards law-making power of the govt through the legislature, he said.
Venugopal said, "This approach would be most appropriate as the governor being a part of the legislature and head of a state would collaborate and ensure that bills passed by the legislature are implemented, straight away, in the best interests of the people of a state." He warned that fastening of timelines on governors and the President would tempt states, which used to resolve differences of opinion with governors on bills, to approach the court the moment assent is even slightly delayed.
Supplementing Venugopal's arguments on collaborative effort but adding to it the ornamental character of the posts of governor and President, Punjab through senior advocate Arvind Datar said the role of governors and the President is that they have the right to be consulted, right to encourage and a right to warn. They may warn the govt about the unconstitutionality of a bill and may return it to legislature for reconsideration, but once it is approved for the second time by the assembly, a governor would have no option but to grant assent, Datar said.
For the Pinarayi Vijayan-headed Kerala govt, nonagenarian and acclaimed senior advocate K K Venugopal remembered the amiable tenure of Khan, and said, "The practice followed in Kerala has been that the governor sends for the minister concerned, who had moved the bill in the assembly, to discuss with him his concerns about the contents of the bill."
"After discussion with the minister, the governor, if satisfied, would grant assent, but in the alternative may decide to send the bill back to the legislature with suggestions for amendment. If, on the other hand, there is no agreement on either of these two counts, the governor would indicate that he intends to withhold assent." Venugopal asked why of the 28 states and three UTs with legislatures, only five states are repeatedly coming to SC being aggrieved by the governor's attempt to stall bills by sitting on them indefinitely. That is because governors in all other states have adopted a collaborative approach towards law-making power of the govt through the legislature, he said.
Venugopal said, "This approach would be most appropriate as the governor being a part of the legislature and head of a state would collaborate and ensure that bills passed by the legislature are implemented, straight away, in the best interests of the people of a state." He warned that fastening of timelines on governors and the President would tempt states, which used to resolve differences of opinion with governors on bills, to approach the court the moment assent is even slightly delayed.
Supplementing Venugopal's arguments on collaborative effort but adding to it the ornamental character of the posts of governor and President, Punjab through senior advocate Arvind Datar said the role of governors and the President is that they have the right to be consulted, right to encourage and a right to warn. They may warn the govt about the unconstitutionality of a bill and may return it to legislature for reconsideration, but once it is approved for the second time by the assembly, a governor would have no option but to grant assent, Datar said.
You may also like
'Anbumani continuing as party President': PMK leader K Balu after Ramadoss removes son from party
India to soon have 50 lakh rooftop solar systems under PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana: Pralhad Joshi
Telling sign Ant and Dec may have been tipped about NTA loss after 23 year reign
If your blood sugar level rises, do these important things immediately; otherwise, you will get into trouble.
Arshad Warsi returns to hosting Bigg Boss after 18 years
