Context:

• The Kerala Government is considering approaching the Supreme Court to determine if the Governor can indefinitely withhold approval for eight Bills passed by the state assembly.

State Bills and the Power of the Governor:

Ordinary Bills:

• Article 200 of the Indian Constitution includes the process for a state bill to be presented to the Governor for assent.
• He may:
  • give his assent to the bill, the bill then becomes an act. 
  • withhold his assent to the bill, the bill then ends and does not become an act. 
  • return the bill for reconsideration of the House or Houses. 
  • reserve the bill for the consideration of the President. 
• If the bill is passed by the House or Houses again with or without amendments and presented to the governor for his assent, the governor must give his assent to the bill. Thus, the Governor enjoys only a ‘suspensive veto’.  He may reserve the bill for the consideration of the President.

Money Bills:

• Every money bill, after it is passed by the state legislature (unicameral or bicameral), is presented to the governor for his assent. 
• He has three alternatives: 
  • He may give his assent to the bill, the bill then becomes an act. 
  • He may withhold his assent to the bill, the bill then ends and does not become an act. 
  • He may reserve the bill for the consideration of the president. 
• Thus, the Governor cannot return a money bill for the reconsideration of the state legislature. Normally, the Governor gives his assent to a money bill as it is introduced in the state legislature with his previous permission.
• When the Governor reserves a money bill for the consideration of the President, he will not have any further role in the enactment of the bill. If the President gives his assent to the bill, it becomes an Act. 
  • This means that the assent of the Governor is no longer required.

Supreme Court’s Ruling: Rameshwar Prasad and Ors. vs Union Of India and Anr.

• The Supreme Court has ruled that the Governor is immune from court proceedings for any act done in the exercise of their powers under Article 361 of the Constitution.
• In this case, the Court ruled that while Article 361(1) grants immunity to the Governor, it does not take away the Court’s power to examine the validity of the Governor’s action, including on the grounds of mala fides. 
  • Thus, if the Governor’s refusal to grant assent is found to be unconstitutional, the Court can strike it down.

Global Precedents:

• United States: The President is empowered by the Constitution to refuse assent and return a Bill to the House but if the Houses again pass it with two thirds of each House the Bill becomes law.
• United Kingdom: Royal assent is necessary for a Bill to be passed by Parliament to become law and the crown has the power to withhold assent. But it is a dead letter. 
  • By practice and usage there is no power of veto exercised by the crown in England now. 

News Source: The Indian Express