Kerala further stated that Governor Arif Mohammed Khan forwarded some bills to President Droupadi Murmu, which are currently pending approval
Supreme Court/ File pic
The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to hear separate petitions from Kerala and West Bengal, both of which claim that their governors have rejected assent to measures passed by their legislative houses. Kerala further stated that Governor Arif Mohammed Khan forwarded some bills to President Droupadi Murmu, which are currently pending approval, reported PTI.
ADVERTISEMENT
According to the report, taking note of the petitions, the Supreme Court sent letters to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries of Kerala Governor Khan and his West Bengal counterpart, CV Ananda Bose, for responses within three weeks.
The bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra also instructed the Trinamool Congress-led West Bengal government to enlist the Home Ministry as a party in the appeal.
Kerala's CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front administration filed a petition in March, claiming that several measures approved by the legislative assembly were forwarded to the president by the governor and are still awaiting approval. West Bengal said that its governor was withholding assent to eight laws, the report added.
Reportedly, Senior counsel KK Venugopal, representing the Kerala government, called the situation "most unfortunate." The court responded: "We are issuing notices to the secretary to the governors and the Union in both cases."
Venugopal continued, "The bills have been languishing for the past eight months. I'm disputing the reference to the president... There is a misunderstanding among the governors. They keep the bills waiting. "This violates the Constitution."
Senior counsel Abhishek Singhvi, representing West Bengal, stated that he would make the Centre a party and file a written notice to help the court. He highlighted examples from other states, like Tamil Nadu, where laws were either cleared or referred to the president after the Supreme Court scheduled a hearing, the PTI report added.
Venugopal suggested that the Supreme Court should provide criteria for when governors can return or refer laws.
According to the report, senior counsel Jaideep Gupta, who represents West Bengal, stated that the governor referred certain proposals to the president once they knew the matter was coming up for hearing.
Kerala indicated that its complaint concerns the governor's decision to defer seven laws to the president, which he should have handled himself. None of these bills address Centre-state relations. These laws have been languishing with the governor for nearly two years, calling the state legislature "ineffective and otiose."
The measures in question are public interest bills that have been rendered ineffective due to the governor's inaction, pursuant to the proviso to Article 200. The state administration stated that on February 23 and 29, the Home Ministry told it that the president had refused assent to four of the seven bills, the PTI report added.
The Constitution does not define how long the president may take to grant assent to a measure passed by a state legislature and referred for presidential consideration. Article 361 of the Constitution states that the president or governor shall not be answerable to any court for their official acts, stated PTI.
The news agency added, "West Bengal stated that withholding of assent for no reason violates Article 200 of the Constitution, which establishes the procedure for presenting a measure enacted by the state assembly to the governor for assent. West Bengal's laws awaiting the governor's approval include the West Bengal University Laws (Amendment) Bill, the West Bengal University of Animal and Fishery Sciences (Amendment) Bill, and others enacted by the state house in 2022 and 2023.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
