SC raps Kerala Guv Arif Mohammed Khan for keeping Bills pending

The Supreme Court rapped the Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan on Wednesday, 29 November for keeping eight bills passed by the Kerala State Legislative Assembly pending for two years before giving assent to one and referring seven to the President.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud pointed out that neither reason nor justification was given by the Governor to keep the Bills pending for such an “inordinately long period”. The court also pointed out that the Governor dealt with the Bills only after notice was issued to the Raj Bhavan on 20 November on the petition filed by Kerala.

“There is some substance in what is being argued by the State here. What was the Governor doing for two years on these Bills… The power of the Governor cannot be used to thwart the normal process of democratic law-making by the legislature,” observed Chief Justice Chandrachud.

"The power of the Governor cannot be utilised to pause the law making exercise of the legislature," the bench added referring to the recent judgment passed in the case relating to the Punjab Governor. "Mr AG, there is some merit in the argument. Why is governor sitting on bills for 2 years?", CJI asked Attorney General for India R Venkataramani.

The bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a writ petition filed by the State of Kerala against the Governor's inaction on eight bills.

Senior advocate KK Venugopal, who appeared for the state government, informed the bench that after notice was issued on the writ petition, the Governor cleared one bill. He pointed out that the governor of any state is part of the legislature under Article 168 of the Constitution. “For every State, there shall be a Legislature which shall consist of the Governor and two Houses to be known respectively as the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly,” states Article 168.

“For two years a welfare bill is not allowed to be law. The governance of the state is suffering. This is adversarial. Unless your lordships step in very strongly, it will affect citizens," Venugopal urged.

“This is an endemic situation,” said Venugopal, while submitting that the governor had promulgated three ordinances which were later converted into bills passed by legislature.

The Kerala government has argued that when the governor is delaying the assent of bills, including money bills, it is "defeating the rights of the people".

The AG assured the bench that the Governor will act on it. "He will act accordingly. I don't think he will sit on money bill," AG said. The bench recorded the AG's response in the order.

Venugopal argued that a Governor cannot simply refer a bill for the President's consideration and urged the Court to issue guidelines for the exercise of that option by the Governor. When the bench pointed out that issuing guidelines would be widening the scope of the present writ petition, Venugopal requested the bench to allow him to amend the petition to seek reliefs regarding guidelines.

This was opposed by the AG who reiterated that the current petition did not seek guidelines.

“If we dispose this petition, how will they move a fresh petition for guidelines? The other bills are pending for two months. There bills were pending for two years. We would be doing a disservice," said Chandrachud, giving liberty to the state to amend the petition.

The state government’s petition had stated, “The conduct of the Governor, as would presently be demonstrated, threatens to defeat and subvert the very fundamentals and basic foundations of our Constitution, including the rule of law and democratic good governance, apart from defeating the rights of the people of the State to the welfare measures sought to be implemented through the Bills.”

Of the eight bills, three have remained pending with the governor for more than two years, and three for more than a year.

The Bills that have been pending are:

1. University Laws Amendment Bill (1st Amendment) 2021 (Bill No 50) – 23 months

2. University Laws Amendment Bill (1st Amendment) 2021 (Bill No. 54) - 23 months

3. University Laws Amendment Bill (2nd Amendment) 2021 [APJ Abdulkalam Technical University (Mal)] – 23 months

4. Kerala Co-operative Societies Amendment Bill 2022 [MILMA] – 14 months

5. University Laws Amendment Bill 2022 – 12 months

6. Kerala Lok Ayukta Amendment Bill 2022 – 12 months

7. University Laws Amendment Bill 2022 – 9 months

8. Public Health Bill 2021 – 5 months

Last week, the Supreme Court had asked the Kerala Governor to read the judgment passed in the Punjab Governor's case.

Earlier this month, the court had questioned Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi over his delay in approving bills that had been sent to him as far back as January 2020. The court had observed that the governor’s inaction was a “matter of serious concern” and wondered why the governor had disposed of a few bills only after the state government had approached the apex court.