Supreme Court questions judicial review of Governor's inaction on State Bills
The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, is examining whether the judiciary can review a Governor's inaction on State Bills under Article 200, drawing parallels with the judicial review of President's Rule under Article 356. This Presidential Reference was prompted by a Tamil Nadu petition against its Governor for delaying assent to Bills since 2020, following a previous judgment that set three-month deadlines. The Centre and several states argue that the Governor's functions under Article 200 are legislative and should not be subject to judicial limitations.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court is deliberating on the judiciary's power to review a Governor's delay in assenting to State Bills under Article 200.
- Chief Justice B.R. Gavai highlighted the inconsistency of reviewing Article 356 discretion but not Article 200 discretion.
- The Presidential Reference was triggered by a petition from Tamil Nadu regarding its Governor's prolonged inaction on Bills since 2020.
- The Centre and some states contend that the Governor's role under Article 200 is legislative and should not be judicially constrained by deadlines.
- The S.R. Bommai case (1994) established the principle of judicial review for the proclamation of President's Rule.
Exam Facts
- Chief Justice of India: B.R. Gavai.
- Article 356 of the Constitution: Pertains to President's Rule.
- Article 200 of the Constitution: Pertains to Governor's assent to Bills.
- S.R. Bommai case (1994): Landmark judgment on judicial review of President's Rule.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.