Roadmap for Answer Writing

1. Introduction 

• Briefly introduce the role of Governors in the legislative process.
• State that recent public discussions have focused on instances of delays in the Governor’s assent to state assembly bills.
• Mention the constitutional provision that gives Governors the power to assent to or withhold assent from state assembly bills (Article 200).

2. Context of the Issue 

• Highlight recent examples where Governors have delayed giving assent:
  • Tamil Nadu NEET Exemption Bill (2023): Governor withheld assent for over a year, raising concerns about political interference.
  • Kerala Lokayukta Amendment Bill (2022): Governor refused assent citing concerns about constitutionality.
• Discuss the impact of such delays on the functioning of state assemblies and the democratic process.

3. Constitutional Powers of Governors 

• Discuss the constitutional basis for the Governor’s power to withhold assent under Article 200 of the Indian Constitution.
  • Governor can either grant assent, withhold it, or reserve the bill for the President’s consideration.
• Mention Article 201, which allows the Governor to return a bill (except Money Bills) to the legislature, which must reconsider it.
• Explain the role of Governors as representatives of the central government and the discretionary powers they hold in the legislative process.

4. Arguments in Favor of a Prescribed Time Limit 

• Promotes Accountability: Ensures timely decision-making, reducing the potential for political interference.
  • Example: The Nabam Rebia Judgment (2016) emphasized limiting the arbitrary exercise of the Governor’s discretion.
• Protects Legislative Autonomy: Ensures state assemblies’ decisions are respected within a reasonable timeframe.
• Reduces Uncertainty: Providing clarity on the Governor’s decision-making timeline enhances transparency and predictability.
• Strengthens Federalism: A specified time limit balances power between the state and central governments, fostering smoother federal functioning.
• Aligns with Democratic Principles: Prevents delays that could interfere with the legislative agenda of the elected government.

5. Arguments Against a Prescribed Time Limit 

• Impeded Deliberation: Imposing time limits may pressure Governors to make hasty decisions, potentially overlooking constitutional issues or flaws in the bill.
• Limited Need for Regulation: Delays in granting assent are rare, and not all cases warrant a time limit.
• Potential for Judicial Intervention: Setting time limits could lead to legal challenges and complications, thereby obstructing the legislative process.
• Discretion by Design: The discretionary powers vested in Governors are essential for maintaining federal stability and upholding democratic principles.
• Respecting the Role of the President: The Governor’s decision could be overruled by the President, limiting the need for a prescribed time limit.

Conclusion 

• Conclude by balancing the need for accountability with the importance of respecting the constitutional role of the Governor.
• Suggest that any reform, including the introduction of time limits, would require careful consideration, and possibly constitutional amendments, to ensure it aligns with India’s federal structure and democratic governance.

Relevant Facts to Include

1. Article 200: Provides the Governor with the discretion to withhold assent, reserve a bill for the President, or grant assent.
2. Article 201: If a bill is returned by the Governor with a request for reconsideration, the legislature may pass it again, and the Governor cannot withhold assent.
3. Nabam Rebia Judgment (2016): The Supreme Court ruled that the Governor’s discretionary powers are not absolute and should not be exercised arbitrarily.
4. Recent Examples:
   • Tamil Nadu NEET Exemption Bill (2023): Delay of over a year by the Governor in giving assent.
   • Kerala Lokayukta Amendment Bill (2022): Governor withholds assent citing constitutionality concerns.
5. Rajamannar Committee: Recommends that Governors should act as constitutional heads of states, not as agents of the Centre, ensuring fairness and impartiality.