[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday expressed “serious concern” over the delay by the Punjab and Tamil Nadu governors in giving assent to bills passed by their respective state governments.
“Our country has been running on established traditions and conventions and they need to be followed,” a bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra told both the Punjab government and the state governor Banwari Lal Purohit.
Hearing another plea filed by the Tamil Nadu government, the apex court said the petition raises a “matter of serious concern”. The court decided to call for assistance from Attorney General R Venkataramani or Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in the matter.
‘Playing with fire’
The SC bench expressed serious concern over the deadlock in Punjab and took a stern view of state governor Banwarilal Purohit not giving assent to bills passed by the state assembly. The court told the governer “you are playing with fire.” It also questioned the governor’s power to term the assembly session as unconstitutional.
The judges also questioned the Punjab government’s decision to adjourn and not prorogue the budget session of its assembly. “Democracy has to work in the hands of the chief minister and the governor,” the SC said, and added that it will pass a short order to settle the law on the issue of governor’s power to give assent to bills.
In its plea, Punjab government had alleged delay by the governor in giving assent to bills passed by the state assembly. The plea said such “unconstitutional inaction” has brought the entire administration to a “grinding halt.”
It said the governor cannot indefinitely sit on the bills as he has restricted powers under Article 200 of the Constitution, which deals with the Raj Bhavan occupant’s power to give or withhold assent to a bill or reserve a bill for the president’s consideration.
‘Matter of serious concern’
On Tamil Nadu’s plea against governor R N Ravi, the Supreme Court sought Centre’s response on the allegations against the governor. The top court also decided to seek the assistance of government’s law officers. The judges called the confrontation between the state government and the governor a matter of serious concern.
During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing on state government’s behalf, said that bills passed 2-3 years back are still pending with the Governor for assent. Singhvi highlighted that the governor is not granting sanction for prosecution of ministers or MLAs involved in corruption cases, adding that more than 54 files relating to remission of prisoners are pending with him.
In its plea filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the Tamil Nadu government has claimed that the governor has positioned himself as a “political rival” to the legitimately elected state government.
The petition said that the governor was not signing remission orders, day to day files, appointment orders, approving recruitment orders, granting approval to prosecute Ministers or MLAs involved in corruption, and Bills passed by the Tamil Nadu legislative assembly.
The state government has sought directions from the Supreme Court to stipulate the outer time limit for the governor to consider Bills passed by the Legislature sent for his assent under Article 200 of the Constitution.
It further sought directions for disposal of all the Bills, files and government orders which are pending with the governor’s office within a specified timeframe.
‘Show me one instance where I have crossed the line’
Meanwhile, Kerala governor Arif Mohammed Khan, who is also involved in a tussle with the state’s Left Front government over assent to certain bills, asserted that he was acting in accordance with the Constitution. The governor accused the state government of crossing the line on several occasions.
“Have they given any evidence that I have created a crisis? Merely making a statement does not mean that. Crisis means when you go beyond the powers or authority which is given to you by the Constitution. Give me one single example of where I have gone beyond that.
“Show me one instance where I have crossed the line. And how many times my own government has crossed the line, there is a long list. So who is creating the crisis?,” Khan said.
The governor also alleged that pensions and salaries are not being paid in the state and, in an apparent reference to the recent Keraleeyam event, he said, but the state was “having big celebrations”.
Recently, the Kerala government has also moved the Supreme Court to raise the issue of the governor not signing certain bills and delaying it indefinitely.
‘Governors are not elected representatives’
On November 6, the top court had said that state governors must not be oblivious to the fact that they are not elected representatives of the people.
It voiced its concern over Raj Bhavans not acting on bills passed by the state legislatures and observed that governors in states must act even before the matter comes to the apex court.
“Our country has been running on established traditions and conventions and they need to be followed,” a bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra told both the Punjab government and the state governor Banwari Lal Purohit.
Hearing another plea filed by the Tamil Nadu government, the apex court said the petition raises a “matter of serious concern”. The court decided to call for assistance from Attorney General R Venkataramani or Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in the matter.
‘Playing with fire’
The SC bench expressed serious concern over the deadlock in Punjab and took a stern view of state governor Banwarilal Purohit not giving assent to bills passed by the state assembly. The court told the governer “you are playing with fire.” It also questioned the governor’s power to term the assembly session as unconstitutional.
The judges also questioned the Punjab government’s decision to adjourn and not prorogue the budget session of its assembly. “Democracy has to work in the hands of the chief minister and the governor,” the SC said, and added that it will pass a short order to settle the law on the issue of governor’s power to give assent to bills.
In its plea, Punjab government had alleged delay by the governor in giving assent to bills passed by the state assembly. The plea said such “unconstitutional inaction” has brought the entire administration to a “grinding halt.”
It said the governor cannot indefinitely sit on the bills as he has restricted powers under Article 200 of the Constitution, which deals with the Raj Bhavan occupant’s power to give or withhold assent to a bill or reserve a bill for the president’s consideration.
‘Matter of serious concern’
On Tamil Nadu’s plea against governor R N Ravi, the Supreme Court sought Centre’s response on the allegations against the governor. The top court also decided to seek the assistance of government’s law officers. The judges called the confrontation between the state government and the governor a matter of serious concern.
During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing on state government’s behalf, said that bills passed 2-3 years back are still pending with the Governor for assent. Singhvi highlighted that the governor is not granting sanction for prosecution of ministers or MLAs involved in corruption cases, adding that more than 54 files relating to remission of prisoners are pending with him.
In its plea filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the Tamil Nadu government has claimed that the governor has positioned himself as a “political rival” to the legitimately elected state government.
The petition said that the governor was not signing remission orders, day to day files, appointment orders, approving recruitment orders, granting approval to prosecute Ministers or MLAs involved in corruption, and Bills passed by the Tamil Nadu legislative assembly.
The state government has sought directions from the Supreme Court to stipulate the outer time limit for the governor to consider Bills passed by the Legislature sent for his assent under Article 200 of the Constitution.
It further sought directions for disposal of all the Bills, files and government orders which are pending with the governor’s office within a specified timeframe.
‘Show me one instance where I have crossed the line’
Meanwhile, Kerala governor Arif Mohammed Khan, who is also involved in a tussle with the state’s Left Front government over assent to certain bills, asserted that he was acting in accordance with the Constitution. The governor accused the state government of crossing the line on several occasions.
“Have they given any evidence that I have created a crisis? Merely making a statement does not mean that. Crisis means when you go beyond the powers or authority which is given to you by the Constitution. Give me one single example of where I have gone beyond that.
“Show me one instance where I have crossed the line. And how many times my own government has crossed the line, there is a long list. So who is creating the crisis?,” Khan said.
The governor also alleged that pensions and salaries are not being paid in the state and, in an apparent reference to the recent Keraleeyam event, he said, but the state was “having big celebrations”.
Recently, the Kerala government has also moved the Supreme Court to raise the issue of the governor not signing certain bills and delaying it indefinitely.
‘Governors are not elected representatives’
On November 6, the top court had said that state governors must not be oblivious to the fact that they are not elected representatives of the people.
It voiced its concern over Raj Bhavans not acting on bills passed by the state legislatures and observed that governors in states must act even before the matter comes to the apex court.
[ad_2]
Source link