In a fresh twist to the issue of 'deadlines assent' with regard to Governors appointments, the Union of India has informed the Supreme Court that the power of Governors and the President to act on Bills is a “high prerogative” function which cannot be bound by judicial timelines.
Centre's second senior most law officer Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued in his written note that the constitutional text deliberately leaves Articles 200 (Governor's powers regarding assent to bills passed by the State Legislature) and 201 (when a Bill is reserved by a Governor for the consideration of the President) without deadlines and that any attempt by the Court to prescribe one would amount to rewriting the Constitution.
Pertinently, the Centre also said that Governors are not mere emissaries or outsiders in a State but carry the will of the people of the entire country into individual States.The submissions were made in the Presidential reference case arising from the Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling which set binding timeframes for Governors to act on Bills and indicated an outer limit for decisions when Bills are reserved for the President. The judgment triggered concerns over whether the Court had crossed into the constitutional space of assent.
President Droupadi Murmu, invoking Article 143(1), referred questions to the Supreme Court on whether such timelines can be judicially imposed, and whether Article 142 can be used to sustain them.A Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Atul S Chandurkar is set to commence hearing in the matter from August 19, Tuesday.
The key points from the Union’s submissions include Constitutional supremacy, not judicial supremacy, Role of Governors is representative, not alien,Assent is sui generis and outside judicial reach, implying assent by Governor or President is neither wholly executive nor wholly legislative, and this unique character makes it non-justiciable (actionable in court).“The gubernatorial assent is a high prerogative, plenary, non-justiciable power which is sui generis (unique) in nature.”
It has also maintained that there has to be no timelines where Constitution is silent. It has also cited Punjab judgment termed per incuriam and contended further that Article 142 has limitsImportant of all, the key point it has raised is that Governors can act in discretion.The Centre relied on case law to say the Governor may apply independent judgment under Article 200 without binding advice.“Accordingly, the Governor is not precluded from exercising discretion under Article 200 even in the absence of aid and advice to that effect.”
Follow us
