TN Bill case to scrap NEET highlights issue of Governor’s crucial role
The demand for constitutionally mandated governors to act within a time limit on files, including those sent to the Raj Bhavan by an elected government, has been repeatedly pushed by Tamil Nadu in recent months. Flagging the issue at the 82nd All India Presiding Officers’ Conference in Shimla last November, Assembly Speaker M. Appavu pointed out that governors sometimes sit on bills without giving assent or returning them “indefinitely”. .
The underlying context was clear. The ruling DMK has been unable to fulfill its poll promise of scrapping NEET. The TN Admission to Undergraduate Medical Degree Course Bill, adopted by the Assembly in September 2021 to abolish NEET and facilitate admission on the basis of plus two marks, is under consideration of Governor RN Ravi. Since NEET comes under the purview of the Centre, it is necessary that the Governor moves the Bill for the assent of the President. This delay has upset Chief Minister MK Stalin, who has argued that it was a fundamental principle of democracy that when the Assembly exercised its authority and enacted a law, the governor “should respect it and give it his assent”. needed”. The governors, although the head of the state executive, are appointed by the central government. “Therefore, when they prevent the assent of a bill, they are virtually rejecting the will of the people of the state,” said Mr. Appavu. He called for establishing a “binding time frame” within which bills must be approved, returned, or reserved for the President’s consideration by governors.
The issue echoed in the Rajya Sabha last month when DMK MP P. Wilson sought an amendment to the Constitution to fix a time limit for governors to act on bills. He said it should be inferred that the Constitution places a “faithful duty” on the governor “to act within a reasonable time frame”. Undue delay in execution of constitutional functions is prima facie unconstitutional. “The governor is ultimately accountable to those on whose behalf, and for whose welfare, the legislature, which carries out the mandate, makes laws.”
The stalling of the NEET exemption bill is not the only one. The previous AIADMK government, despite being an ally of the BJP, could not get its bid from the then Governor Banwarilal Purohit. For almost 45 days, he did not approve the 2020 Bill providing for 7.5% horizontal reservation for NEET-qualified government school students in medical colleges. Pushed to a corner by the DMK, erstwhile Edappadi K. The Palaniswami government hurriedly took the executive route to issue a GO to give effect to its decision. Mr. Purohit cleared the bill the next day but justified the delay, saying he was waiting for the Solicitor General’s opinion.
Curiously, Mr. Purohit did not follow the same legal criterion for the second law of sensitive nature. He almost immediately cleared a bill providing 10.5% internal reservation for Vanniakula Kshatriyas within the quota for MBCs, which was adopted by the House hours before the Election Commission notified the Assembly election schedule. The quota has been set aside by the Madras High Court and is subject to appeal before the Supreme Court. A related aspect of this puzzle flagged by Sri Appavu is important. If the President withholds assent and returns a Bill, should he not give reasons, Mr. Appavu asked. With this, the assembly will be able to make another bill, removing the shortcomings. In 2017, the President withheld assent to two NEET exemption bills passed by the Assembly, the reasons for which are unknown. There is a need to pursue Tamil Nadu’s demand to ensure action on the legislative acts of Governors and Presidents.
Sureshkumar.d@thehindu.co.in
,