The Supreme Court on Friday expressed deep concern over the impasse between the Punjab government and Governor Banwarilal Purohit regarding the approval of bills passed by the assembly, describing it as a matter of ‘serious concern.’ The bench, comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, conveyed dissatisfaction with the unfolding situation in the state and asked to Punjab Governer to take his decision on pending bill which have been passed by Assembly.
Addressing both the Punjab government and the Governor, the bench emphasized the importance of adhering to established traditions and conventions that the country has been following. Supreme Court rebuked the Punjab governor for not granting assent to the assembly-approved bills, cautioning that such actions were akin to “playing with fire.” Besides this, the court questioned the governor’s authority to label the assembly session as unconstitutional.
The bench also raised inquiries with the Punjab government, seeking clarification on why the budget session of the assembly was adjourned rather than prorogued. It asserted that democracy must function collaboratively between the Chief Minister and the governor. The court declared its intention to issue a concise order to clarify the legal aspects concerning the governor’s power to approve bills.
On November 6, the Supreme Court had previously asserted that state governors must be cognizant of the fact that they are not elected representatives of the people. Expressing concern over Raj Bhavans’ lack of action on bills passed by state legislatures, the court directed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to provide details of the steps taken by Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit regarding the bills approved by the assembly.
The Punjab government had approached the top court, alleging unwarranted delays by Governor Banwarilal Purohit in granting assent to the assembly-passed bills. The plea contended that such “unconstitutional inaction” had severely hampered the administration.
Highlighting the limitations imposed by Article 200 of the Constitution, which governs the governor’s authority to grant or withhold assent to a bill or reserve it for the president’s consideration, the plea argued that the governor cannot indefinitely withhold approval. The ongoing feud between the Punjab governor and the Aam Aadmi Party government, led by Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, was also underscored.
During the proceedings, the Chief Justice of India went as far as stating that the governor was “playing with fire” by withholding assent to the four bills in question.