Image Credit: President's Secretariat
SC Rules Courts Can’t Set Timelines for President, Governors
The Supreme Court has held that constitutional courts cannot impose fixed timelines on the President or state Governors for granting assent to bills under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution. The bench clarified that directing the Head of State to act within a prescribed period would be unconstitutional and beyond judicial authority. The ruling came in response to questions raised over delays in bill approvals across several states.
What the Court Clarified
Although the Court rejected the idea of “deemed assent” — the concept that a bill becomes law automatically if no action is taken within a certain period — it stated that Governors and the President cannot sit on bills indefinitely. If a delay is prolonged and without justification, courts may direct the authority to “take a decision” but cannot dictate what that decision should be, nor can they specify deadlines.
Impact on Centre–State Dynamics
The verdict underscores the separation of powers and affirms the discretionary space provided to constitutional authorities. It also places responsibility on both state governments and Raj Bhavans to maintain communication and resolve legislative logjams through dialogue rather than litigation. Analysts say the ruling may prompt clearer administrative practices to prevent long delays in the assent process.
