‘Can timelines be imposed and manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial order
‘Can timelines be imposed and manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders?’: President Murmu asks Supreme Court on assent to Bills
M.U.H
15/05/202538
With the Supreme Court setting timelines for the President and Governors to act on Bills sent by state assemblies, President Droupadi Murmu has sought the top court’s opinion under Article 143(1) on whether their actions are justiciable and whether such timelines can be imposed on them in the absence of any such provision in the Constitution.
In April this year, the Supreme Court set a timeline for Governors to act on Bills, and for the first time, prescribed that the President should take a decision on the Bills reserved for consideration by the Governor within three months from the date on which such reference is received. Under Article 201 of the Constitution, no timeframe has been set for a presidential decision.
The top court said that “in case of any delay beyond this period, appropriate reasons would have to be recorded and conveyed” to the state concerned. The court, in a ruling, declared the action of Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi as illegal and erroneous in reserving 10 Bills for consideration of the President in November 2023 after they had already been reconsidered by the state Assembly.
“Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India justiciable? In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed timeline and the manner of exercise of powers by the President, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India?” the President has sought to know.
“Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India justiciable? Is Article 361 of the Constitution of India an absolute bar to judicial review in relation to the actions of a Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit, and the manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of all powers under Article 200 of the Constitution of India by the Governor?” President Murmu asked.
The reference also sought to know; whether “in light of the constitutional scheme governing the powers of the President, is the President required to seek advice of the Supreme Court by way of a reference under Article 143 of the Constitution of India and take the opinion of the Supreme Court when the Governor reserves a Bill for the President’s assent or otherwise?”
“Are the decisions of the Governor and the President under Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution of India, respectively, justiciable at a stage anterior into the law coming into force? Is it permissible for the Courts to undertake judicial adjudication over the contents of a Bill, in any manner, before it becomes law?” and “can the exercise of constitutional powers and the orders of/by the President / Governor be substituted in any manner under Article 142 of the Constitution of India?”
Some of the other questions referred to the SC are, “What are the constitutional options before a Governor when a Bill is presented to him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?; Is the Governor bound by the aid & advice tendered by the Council of Ministers while exercising all the options available with him when a Bill is presented before him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?”
President Murmu pointed out that Article 200 of the Constitution, which prescribes the powers of the Governor and the procedure to be followed while assenting to Bills, withholding assent to Bills and reserving a Bill for the consideration of the President, “does not stipulate any time frame upon the Governor for the exercise of constitutional options.”
Article 201 prescribes the powers of the President and the procedure to be followed while assenting to Bills or withholding assent therefrom, but “does not stipulate any time frame or procedure to be followed by the President for the exercise of constitutional options under” it.
