Governor's Discretion, Judicial Review, and Article 200: A Constitutional Conundrum for UPSC
Introduction
A recent hearing in the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, has brought a critical constitutional issue to the forefront—one that is highly relevant for the UPSC examination. The core question is: If the judiciary can review a Governor's action under Article 356 (President's Rule), why can it not examine the Governor's inaction on State Bills under Article 200?
This blog will deconstruct this issue, link it to the UPSC syllabus, analyze the associated constitutional articles, and review important previous year questions to help you build a comprehensive understanding.
The Core of the Controversy: What did the SC say?
During a hearing on a Presidential Reference (a process where the President seeks the Supreme Court's opinion under Article 143), the CJI-led bench posed a sharp question to the Centre and BJP-ruled states like Maharashtra.
The Trigger: The reference was sparked by an April 8 Supreme Court judgment in the Tamil Nadu vs. Governor case, where the Governor had sat on bills for years. The Court had then set a three-month deadline for Governors to decide on bills.
The States' Argument: Represented by senior advocates, states like Maharashtra argued that giving assent to a bill is a "culminating step of the legislative procedure" and falls within the Governor's "wide discretionary powers." They contended that any misconduct by the Governor should be addressed by Parliament, not the judiciary.
The Judiciary's Counter: CJI Gavai logically countered this by referencing the landmark S.R. Bommai case (1994), where it was established that the Governor's discretion under Article 356 is subject to judicial review to check mala fide intentions. The Court questioned why this same principle of accountability should not apply to the Governor's duty under Article 200.
Constitutional Provisions at a Glance
To understand the debate, one must be clear on these two articles:
Article 200: Assent to Bills
When a Bill passed by the state legislature is presented to the Governor, they can:
Give assent.
Withhold assent.
Reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President (mandatory in some cases).
Return the Bill (if it is not a Money Bill) with a message for reconsideration.
The Grey Area: The Constitution does not specify a time limit for the Governor to take any of these actions, leading to the current impasse.
Article 356: President's Rule
If the President, on receipt of a report from the Governor or otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen where the state government cannot function as per the Constitution, he/she can impose President's Rule.
The Precedent (S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, 1994): The Supreme Court held that the proclamation under Article 356 is justiciable. The Court can review whether it was based on mala fide, irrelevant, or absurd grounds. This case curtailed the arbitrary use of this power.
The Logical Dilemma: The Supreme Court's reasoning is that if the higher-stakes power of dismissing an elected government (Art. 356) can be reviewed, the simpler, routine administrative function of giving assent to bills (Art. 200) certainly can be.
Connecting to the UPSC Syllabus
This issue touches multiple segments of the UPSC syllabus:
GS Paper II:
Indian Constitution—Historical Underpinnings, Evolution, Features, Amendments, Significant Provisions.
Functions and Responsibilities of the Union and the States.
Separation of Powers between various organs.
Dispute Redressal Mechanisms and Institutions.
Comparison of the Indian Constitutional Scheme with other Countries.
GS Paper II: Governance
Role of Constitutional Bodies (Governor).
Important Aspects of Governance.
Essays: Topics related to federalism, democracy, judicial activism, and center-state relations.
Optional Subjects: Especially for Political Science & International Relations and Law.
Previous Year Questions (PYQs) within the Last 8 Years
This theme has been consistently asked. Here are some relevant questions:
2023: "The Supreme Court of India keeps a check on arbitrary power of the Parliament in amending the Constitution." Discuss critically. (While on amendment power, it tests the theme of judicial review vs. other organs)
2022: "Discuss the essential conditions for the exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature." (Directly on Governor's legislative role)
2021: "Which steps are required for constitutionalization of a Commission? Do you think imparting constitutionality to the National Commission for Women would ensure greater gender justice and empowerment in India? Give reasons." (Tests understanding of constitutional bodies vs. executive bodies)
2020: "Judicial Legislation is antithetical to the doctrine of separation of powers as envisaged in the Indian Constitution. In this context justify the filing of a large number of public interest petitions praying for issuing guidelines to executive authorities." (Directly on Judiciary vs. Executive)
2018: "Whether the Supreme Court Judgement (July 2018) can settle the political tussle between the Lt. Governor and elected government of Delhi?" (A direct case study on the powers of a nominated head vs. an elected government)
2017: "The role of the Governor is especially critical in the hung assemblies. Examine." (Related to Governor's discretion)
2016: "Discuss the essentials of the 69th Constitutional Amendment Act and its impact on the Delhi administration. Also, throw light on the recent controversies between the elected government and the Lt. Governor." (Another center-state relations question)
Key Terms and Concepts for Mains Answer Writing
Doctrine of Separation of Powers
Checks and Balances
Judicial Review & Judicial Activism
Constitutional Morality vs. Constitutional Propriety
Cooperative Federalism
Role of Governor: Constitutional Head vs. Agent of the Centre
S.R. Bommai Judgment (1994)
Nabam Rebia Judgment (2016) (on Governor's power to summon the House)
Presidential Reference (Article 143)
Way Forward and Conclusion
The Supreme Court's stand indicates a move towards filling a constitutional vacuum. The indefinite sitting on bills by a Governor, an unelected representative of the President, strikes at the root of responsible government and popular will embodied by the state legislature.
A possible resolution could be a constitutional amendment prescribing a reasonable time frame for Governors to act on bills, similar to the 15-day limit for the President to decide on an ordinance re-promulgation, as held in the Krishna Kumar Singh case (2017).
For UPSC aspirants, this ongoing tussle is a live case study in:
The evolving nature of the Indian Constitution.
The dynamics between the Centre and States.
The proactive role of the judiciary as a guardian of the Constitution.
Keep analyzing such current affairs through a constitutional lens. It is not just about news; it's about understanding the functioning of the world's largest democracy.
Stay Informed, Stay Ahead!
- Team Suryavanshi IAS
No comments:
Post a Comment