The frequency of governors’ conduct or inaction calling for judicial scrutiny reflects the poor state of relations between the Raj Bhavan and the chief ministers concerned. The Supreme Court will soon hear an extraordinary petition Demanded the Government of Telangana to direct the Governor, Dr. Tamilisai Soundararajan, to give assent to the Bills passed by the State Assembly. Recently, the The apex court disposed of a petition by the Punjab government It was aggrieved by the alleged delay by the governor in convening the assembly. The matter was resolved when it was submitted on behalf of the Governor that the Assembly would meet on the day desired by the State Government. In earlier decades, petitions seeking directions to governors or questioning their inaction on constitutional matters were thrown at the threshold. However, it is the extent to which the office of the Governor is being highly politicized by those in power that may now compel the courts to examine whether such inaction is justified. Recent years have seen a disturbing trend of some governors delaying decisions indefinitely in the absence of time limits in the Constitution. This strategy effectively blocks the legislative agenda of the elected regime.
The conflict between the Raj Bhavan and the Chief Minister’s Office, seen in many states, is more intense in Telangana. Dr. Soundararajan has alleged that Chief Minister K.K. He is being ostracized by Chandrasekhar Rao and his questions are not being answered. The state government, for its part, is apparently upset that it is trying to act independent of the cabinet. A recent tweet from his account a day after the state government went to court – conveying that the Raj Bhavan is closer than Delhi – shows that his stance is linked to his view that the government is unfriendly and impolite . These views should not matter on constitutional issues. The Governor can either assent to a bill or reject it, or reserve it for the consideration of the President. In appropriate cases, it may also be returned for reconsideration. However, none of this should be based on the personal views of the Governor on the contents of the Bill. A topical question can be understood if a bill appears to violate fundamental rights, but a pertinent question that requires an official pronouncement from the court is whether the governor has to decide on its validity or the competence of the legislature. whenever a Bill is presented for assent. As the Supreme Court recently remarked, interactions between constitutional functionaries should not become a race to the bottom. Constitutional functions should not be held hostage to political and personal differences.
Click here to read this editorial in Telugu.
Click here to read this editorial in Hindi.
Click here to read this editorial in Tamil.