Why sitting tight on bills for 2 years: SC reminds Kerala Governor of accountability

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Kerala Governor as to why he was sitting tight on Bills passed by the state assembly for two years, saying that there has to be accountability on his part.

The top court said it will leave the matter to the sagacity of the Kerala Chief Minister and the Governor to resolve, or it would lay down guidelines on the power of the governor.

Appearing for the Kerala government, senior advocate K K Venugopal submitted before a three-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud that guidelines should be formulated by this court on the powers of a governor. 

Opposing the plea, Attorney General R Venkatramani submitted that the petition was limited for issuance of directions to the Governor and broader issues cannot arise out of this petition.

At the outset, the state government informed the court that as of now seven out of eight bills have been sent for Presidential assent, and this is just to delay the case. Venugopal said that the Governor can do so only if there is an inconsistency with a central law. The bench noted that the primary grievance worked out after the Governor acted on eight bills, and asked why the Governor acted only after the court issued notice.

In its plea, the Kerala government claimed inaction on the part of the Governor in relation to as many as eight Bills passed by the state legislature.

The bench, also comprising justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, noted that the reliefs sought by state of Kerala comprise of a declaration that the Governor is bound to dispose bills presented within a reasonable time and a mandamus to Governor to give assent to pending bills.

The bench noted that no reason has been given by the Governor to keep the bills pending. 

"As observed in the Punjab judgment, the power of Governor cannot be utilised to pause law-making exercise of legislature," the bench said. 

The bench said that if the Governor says that he will invite the CM, let the CM and the minister who moved the bill, both meet the Governor. 

The bench said that it will record that the Governor will discuss the matter with both the CM and the minister in charge. Venugopal alleged that the Governor wants a face-saving exercise.

The bench asked the Kerala government counsel whether this was a plea to resolve the issue or settle political scores. 

Venugopal asked for the Bills to be discussed by the minister-in-charge instead of the CM. 

The bench replied, "How can the CM say that as head of the state, I know nothing about the bills?"

Venugopal said, "I think it is tragic that the Governor stands in the way of implementation of the law. Instead of working with the Assembly, the governor is acting as an adversary".

The AG said every Bill is not a people friendly Bill and there are certain bills, of course, that the Governor cannot keep pending. 

The CJI asked the AG, “two years, 2021 Bill…”. 

The AG said there is both a political as well as a non-political dimension, and that he is not keen to open up about it. 

The bench told the AG there is some substance in Venugopal’s argument, “what is the Governor doing for two years sitting tight on these bills…we get into it. There is accountability by the Governors. Accountability also by us towards our constitutional duties…”.

The bench allowed the state government to move an amendment to the petition, since broader issues were raised as a result of subsequent developments in the matter.

Opposing it, the AG said there should be a proper petition regarding the power of Governor. 

The bench pointed out that eight bills have been pending for two years. "If we were to dispose of the petition, we would be doing disservice,” the bench said.

The court told the counsels for the Governor and the state government, "Let us hope some political sagacity takes over to resolve the issue, otherwise we are here to lay down the law and do our duty under the Constitution".