Set time-frame for Governors to send bills to President: TN Speaker

With the legislation on NEET passed by the House weighing heavily on his mind, Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker M Appavu on Tuesday pitched the need for the President to spell out the reasons if he rejects a Bill passed by a state assembly.

At the same breath, the Speaker also spoke about Governors’ “sitting over” bills without giving their assent or returning them for an “indefinite period”, and pitched for fixing a “timeframe” for Governors to send Bills to the President for his assent.

In his speech titled ‘Responsibility of Presiding Officers towards Constitution’ at the 82nd All-India Presiding Officers’ Conference in Shimla, Appavu also spoke about the need to embrace new technologies to connect the people to the Houses and throw open the functioning of the House to public scrutiny, “for sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

Terming it as an “important issue”, Appavu said when a Bill is passed by majority and sent for Governor’s assent, the Governors’ “sometimes sit over the Bill” without giving his assent or returning the Bill for an indefinite period though the Constitution requires it to be done “as soon as possible”.

Governors take months together to reserve Bills for the assent of the President, even though they are bound to do so immediately, Appavu said, adding that this “erodes the authority of the legislatures.” “We have to work together to set a binding time frame within which Bills have to be assented to, returned or reserved for the consideration of the Hon’ble President of India by the Hon’ble Governors,” he added.

The Speaker’s comments assume significance in the wake of a Bill passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly in September seeking exemption for students from the state from NEET still pending before Governor R N Ravi. It is not clear whether the Bill has been sent to President Ram Nath Kovind.

“When a Bill passed by the State is reserved for the consideration of the Hon’ble President, and if the Hon’ble President withholds the assent and returns the Bill, shouldn't the Hon’ble President give reasons for such return? How else will the House that enacted the Bill know what is the real impediment in withholding the assent?” he asked.

Since the House reflects the will of the people, Appavu asserted, withholding assent to a Bill amounts to rejection of the will of the people of that state. “Therefore, are not the people entitled to know at least the reason for which the Bill was not assented to? If the House knows the reasons, maybe they can enact another Bill, correcting the shortfalls that caused the Hon’ble President to withhold the assent,” he said.

In 2017, the Union Government had rejected a similar Bill passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly but gave no reasons for its decision. NEET is an emotive issue in Tamil Nadu and the DMK has promised to take steps to ensure that the exam is abolished in the state.

On the role of presiding officers, Appavu said presiding officers are the ultimate arbiter and interpreter of the Rules for the functioning of the House and his decisions are final and binding and ordinarily cannot be questioned or challenged before the constitutional courts.

“A very heavy responsibility is cast on the Presiding Officers to ensure that the independent and sovereign functions of the Legislature are guided in accordance with the Constitution so that the Judicial branch is not called upon to test the decisions of the Speakers,” he said.

Check out latest DH videos here