M.A. Baby Condemns Supreme Court Stand on Governor’s Delay in Clearing Bills

New Delhi: CPI(M) General Secretary M.A. Baby condemned the Supreme Court’s response to the Presidential Reference on the powers of Governors regarding assent to state legislation. Calling the court’s stand “deplorable and shocking,” Baby said the judiciary must not hesitate to play a meaningful role in maintaining constitutional checks and balances between the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary.

According to him, the court’s observations contain an inherent contradiction. “On the one hand, the Supreme Court says that a timeline cannot be set for granting assent to bills; and on the other, it says that the court can exercise limited judicial review to direct the Governor to decide in a time-bound manner,” he said. M.A. Baby questioned how such a “time-bound” period would be defined and stressed that the judiciary should not absolve itself of its constitutional responsibility.

M.A. Baby’s remarks came in response to the Supreme Court verdict delivered on Thursday regarding delays by the President and Governors in approving bills passed by state legislatures.

In its decision, the Supreme Court stated that a Governor does not have the authority to indefinitely block bills passed by the Legislative Assembly. The court reiterated that the Constitution provides only three options to a Governor: grant assent, return the bill to the Assembly for reconsideration, or refer it to the President.

At the same time, the court held that it cannot prescribe a fixed deadline for Governors to act on bills. It stated that judicial intervention is possible only when there is “significant” or “unreasonable” delay.

The issue of prolonged delays by Governors has been a key constitutional and political concern raised repeatedly by several state governments, including Kerala and Tamil Nadu, where bills passed unanimously by the Assembly have been kept pending for long periods.