In a move that could significantly speed up the lawmaking process in India’s states, the Supreme Court has now made it clear the President of India must take a decision on bills reserved by state Governors within three months of receiving them. This historic ruling brings long-awaited clarity to a part of the Constitution that until now had been surrounded by uncertainty and, often, misuse.

A Landmark Moment in India’s Democratic Process

Every law passed by a state assembly holds the hopes and efforts of the people it represents. When such laws get delayed or indefinitely stalled, it causes frustration not only among lawmakers but also among citizens who wait for progress. Recognizing this concern, the Supreme Court has made an important intervention to ensure that democracy functions with purpose and urgency.

In a detailed judgment that runs over 400 pages, the Court reminded both the Governors and the President that they are constitutional authorities, not political gatekeepers. The delay in action on bills sometimes for years has become a major issue in recent times. The ruling is a much-needed reminder that the power to legislate should not be held hostage to politics or silence.

Why This Decision Matters

This verdict came after Tamil Nadu challenged the prolonged delay by its Governor in giving assent to 12 important bills. Some of these had been pending since 2020. When the Governor finally acted, he chose to withhold assent to 10 of them, which led the state assembly to re-enact those bills. However, those too were reserved for the President’s consideration leading to further delays.

The Supreme Court has now ruled that once a bill is returned by the Governor and then passed again by the Assembly, the Governor must act within one month. If a bill is reserved for the President, the President must decide within three months of receiving it. If there’s a delay beyond that period, the Centre must give proper reasons for the same.

This ruling sends a strong message that constitutional posts cannot be used to block the democratic will of elected representatives. The Governor is expected to act based on the advice of the State Council of Ministers. Any delay beyond reasonable time is now open to judicial review.

No Place for Pocket Vetoes Anymore

One of the most powerful parts of this judgment is the Supreme Court’s clear stand against the idea of a “pocket veto” where bills are simply ignored without any action. The Court ruled that there is no provision in the Constitution for a Governor or President to sit silently on a bill. They must either approve it or return it with reasons. Doing nothing is not an option.

This is an affirmation of the idea that governance must be accountable. Elected representatives work hard to draft and pass legislation for the benefit of the public. Delaying that process by inaction is not only undemocratic but unconstitutional.

Strengthening the Spirit of Federalism

The Supreme Court also emphasized the need for cooperation between the Centre and the States. The judgment called upon both sides to answer each other’s queries and act on each other’s suggestions in good faith and without delay. This is a vital step toward strengthening the spirit of cooperative federalism that India’s Constitution envisions.

In a country as diverse and vast as India, smooth coordination between the Centre and States is essential for efficient governance. This verdict re-establishes that balance of power with fairness and clarity.

Looking Ahead

This ruling doesn’t just settle one case it lays down a framework for future interactions between Governors, the President, and State governments across India. It ensures that no law passed by a state assembly will be left hanging in uncertainty. The verdict safeguards the very heartbeat of democracy the will of the people by ensuring that their elected representatives are heard and their work respected.

It is a reminder that while power may lie with constitutional offices, responsibility lies even more so. And with responsibility must come transparency, timeliness, and respect for the Constitution.

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is based on the Supreme Court’s publicly released judgment and verified news reports. Any legal interpretations are intended for informational purposes only. For official legal advice or updates, please refer to the Supreme Court of India or authorized government sources.

Also Read:

Supreme Court Clarifies Order XII Rule 6 CPC Judgment Can Be Passed on Admissions, Oral or Written

Supreme Court Speaks Up: Justice Is Not About Moral Policing

Supreme Court on Marine Insurance: Unreasonable Terms Cannot Deny Justice