In a first, Supreme Court sets deadline for President to decide on bills

For the first time, the Supreme Court has stated that the President is required to make a decision on bills sent by governors within three months. The supreme court’s decision was issued as it overturned the Tamil Nadu Governor’s choice to deny approval to pending bills on Tuesday. The order was announced to the public on Friday.

In the Tamil Nadu case ruling, a panel of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan stated that the President’s exercise of powers under Article 201 is subject to judicial review. According to Article 201, when a bill is reserved by a governor, the President must announce whether he/she approves the bill or denies assent. Nevertheless, the Constitution does not specify a timeframe. The Supreme Court emphasized that the President lacks a “pocket veto” and must either approve or deny assent.

“The position of law is settled that even where no time-limit is prescribed for the exercise of any power under a statute, it should be exercised within a reasonable time. The exercise of powers by the President under Article 201 cannot be said to be immune to this general principle of law,” the Supreme Court said.

The two-judge bench said in case of a delay beyond the three-month period, the appropriate reasons would have to be recorded and conveyed to the concerned state.

“We prescribe that the President is required to take a decision on the bills reserved for his consideration by the governor within a period of three months from the date on which such reference is received,” the top court said.

The court also stated that if no measures are taken within the specified period, the affected states may seek recourse in the courts. If a bill is held back because of concerns regarding its constitutional validity, the supreme court emphasized that the executive should not take on the responsibilities of the judiciary. It stated that these questions ought to be submitted to the Supreme Court according to Article 143.

“We have no qualms in stating that the hands of the executive are tied when engaging with purely legal issues in a bill and only the constitutional courts have the prerogative to study and provide recommendations as regards the constitutionality of a bill,” the Supreme Court said.

The top court’s order came as it ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi acted illegally by withholding assent to 10 bills cleared by the DMK government. The court, while setting deadlines for governors to act on bills, said inaction could be subject to judicial review .