NEW DELHI: In an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court has, for the first time, set a three-month deadline for the President to decide on bills forwarded by state governors from the date of receipt.
"We deem it appropriate to adopt the timeline prescribed by the ministry of home affairs... and prescribe that the President is required to take a decision on the bills reserved for his consideration by the governor within a period of three months from the date on which such reference is received," the SC said.
"In case of any delay beyond this period, appropriate reasons would have to be recorded and conveyed to the concerned State. The States are also required to be collaborative and extend co-operation by furnishing answers to the queries which may be raised and consider the suggestions made by the Central government expeditiously," it added.
This comes four days after the apex court approved 10 bills that had been stalled and reserved by Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi for the President Droupadi Murmu 's consideration—and established a timeline for all governors to act on bills passed by state assemblies.
What had SC said on governors sitting on bills?
On April 8, a bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan nullified the second round of reserving the 10 bills for the President’s consideration, declaring it illegal and legally flawed.
The top court had noted that "where the governor reserves a Bill for the consideration of the President and the President in turn withholds assent thereto then, it shall be open to the state government to assail such an action before this Court".
It had criticised Tamil Nadu governor for violating constitutional provisions by delaying action on bills passed by the state assembly. It also established a timeline for Raj Bhavans to approve or reject state legislature bills promptly, to avoid a repeat of the Tamil Nadu situation.
“Withholding of assent or reservation of bills for the consideration of the President, after their due reconsideration by the state legislature, being in contravention of the procedure prescribed under Article 200, is declared erroneous in law and thus hereby set aside. As a result of the above finding, any consequential steps that might have been taken by the President on these 10 bills is set aside,” the bench said.
"We deem it appropriate to adopt the timeline prescribed by the ministry of home affairs... and prescribe that the President is required to take a decision on the bills reserved for his consideration by the governor within a period of three months from the date on which such reference is received," the SC said.
"In case of any delay beyond this period, appropriate reasons would have to be recorded and conveyed to the concerned State. The States are also required to be collaborative and extend co-operation by furnishing answers to the queries which may be raised and consider the suggestions made by the Central government expeditiously," it added.
This comes four days after the apex court approved 10 bills that had been stalled and reserved by Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi for the President Droupadi Murmu 's consideration—and established a timeline for all governors to act on bills passed by state assemblies.
What had SC said on governors sitting on bills?
On April 8, a bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan nullified the second round of reserving the 10 bills for the President’s consideration, declaring it illegal and legally flawed.
The top court had noted that "where the governor reserves a Bill for the consideration of the President and the President in turn withholds assent thereto then, it shall be open to the state government to assail such an action before this Court".
It had criticised Tamil Nadu governor for violating constitutional provisions by delaying action on bills passed by the state assembly. It also established a timeline for Raj Bhavans to approve or reject state legislature bills promptly, to avoid a repeat of the Tamil Nadu situation.
“Withholding of assent or reservation of bills for the consideration of the President, after their due reconsideration by the state legislature, being in contravention of the procedure prescribed under Article 200, is declared erroneous in law and thus hereby set aside. As a result of the above finding, any consequential steps that might have been taken by the President on these 10 bills is set aside,” the bench said.
You may also like
Sam Thompson seen enjoying bike ride with mystery woman as ex Zara McDermott moves on
Truth behind claims Sky Sports could boycott Saudi F1 GP in support of Ralf Schumacher
'I've seen that death isn't the end - the afterlife has seven unique stages'
Hudson river helicopter crash: Five theories of what could have caused tragedy - from birds to low fuel
Gold worth Rs 6.3 crore seized at Mumbai airport, two arrested
