LI Network
Published on: March 23, 2024 at 21:29 IST
Kerala government has taken a significant step by approaching the Supreme Court against the President of India for withholding assent to four bills passed by the state legislature, without providing any reasons, and against the state governor for delaying action on seven bills for as long as two years, before referring them to the President. Terming these actions as “manifestly arbitrary,” Kerala’s ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF) government has urged the Supreme Court to declare the reference to the President as “unconstitutional and lacking in good faith.”
In a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the state government argued that the President, with advice from the Council of Ministers, did not provide any rationale for withholding assent to four out of the seven bills reserved by the Governor. This, the petition argues, violates Article 14 of the Constitution, as well as Article 200 and 201.
The petition further contends that the Governor’s delay in addressing the bills for up to two years has disrupted the functioning of the state legislature and rendered it ineffective. It asserts that even public interest bills aimed at the welfare of the people have been rendered ineffective due to the Governor’s inaction.
Highlighting the Governor’s public criticisms against the state government and the Chief Minister, the plea suggests that the referral of bills pending for up to two years to the President is unjust. It alleges that the Governor’s actions have obstructed the functioning of the government and the state legislative assembly, going against constitutional principles.
The petition notes that after intervention from the Supreme Court, the governor granted assent to one bill but referred seven others to the President, who subsequently withheld assent to four of them. The state argues that the Governor failed to mention the prolonged delay in addressing these bills when making references to the President.
This legal challenge sets the stage for a potential constitutional confrontation and underscores the complexities of state-federal relations in India’s governance structure.