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
Isle of Wight: Plane crashes into UK holiday park with 'loud bang' as flames seen
Gogglebox stars Sue and Steve's life off-screen from rarely-seen children to jobs
Beautiful European country shares price tourists will need to pay when they visit
Molly-Mae Hague soaks up the sunshine in theme park visit with daughter Bambi
Murshidabad erupts over Waqf Act; BJP leaders slam Mamata for 'fuelling unrest', ignoring law and order
