SC Issues Notices on Kerala and West Bengal Pleas Over Denial of Assent to Bills

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider the separate pleas from opposition-ruled Kerala and West Bengal, alleging the denial of assent to bills passed by their respective legislative assemblies.

Kerala Government claimed that Governor Arif Mohammed Khan referred certain bills to President Droupadi Murmu, which are yet to be cleared.

Taking note of the pleas, the top court issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries of Kerala Governor Khan and West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose, seeking their replies within three weeks.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud along with Justices JB Pardiwal and Manoj Misra, also directed the Trinamool Congress-led West Bengal government to include the home ministry as a party to the petition.

In March this year, the CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front government of Kerala approached the Supreme Court alleging that certain bills passed by the legislative assembly were referred to the president by the governor and were still pending assent.

West Bengal government, in its plea, alleged that the governor was withholding assent on eight bills.

Representing Kerala Government, Senior advocate KK Venugopal described the situation as “most unfortunate.”

“We are issuing notices to the secretaries of the governors and the Union in both cases,” the bench said.

Venugopal added, “The bills have been pending for the last eight months. I am challenging the reference to the president itself… This is confusion among the governors. They keep the bills pending, which is against the Constitution.”

Appearing for West Bengal Government, Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, said he would include the Centre as a party and file a written note to assist the court in deciding the plea. He noted that, in other states, including Tamil Nadu, bills were either cleared or referred to the president as soon as the Supreme Court fixed the cases for hearing.

Venugopal argued that the Supreme Court should establish guidelines on when governors can return or refer bills.

Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, also representing West Bengal, noted that the governor referred certain bills to the president after being informed that the matter was coming up for hearing in the top court.

“Although there is no official communication, we have learned about this development,” he added.

Kerala’s plea concerned the governor reserving seven bills for the president’s consideration, which he was required to deal with himself. The state claimed that none of these bills related to Centre-state relations and that their pending status, which had lasted about two years, had “subverted” the functioning of the state legislature, rendering it “ineffective and otiose.”

The bills included public interest legislation that had been rendered ineffective by the governor’s delay in addressing them, contrary to the requirement of Article 200 of the Constitution. The Kerala government stated that, on February 23 and 29, the home ministry informed them that the president had withheld assent to four of the seven bills: University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021; Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2022; University Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2022; and University Laws (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, 2022.

The Constitution does not specify the time frame within which the president must grant assent to a bill passed by a state legislature and referred to the Rashtrapati Bhavan. Article 361 states that the president or governor shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of their office duties or for any act done in the exercise of those powers.

West Bengal’s plea contended that withholding assent without providing reasons was contrary to Article 200 of the Constitution, which outlines the process for a bill passed by a state assembly to be presented to the governor for assent. The governor may either assent to the bill, withhold assent, or reserve the bill for presidential consideration.

The bills awaiting the governor’s consent in West Bengal include the West Bengal University Laws (Amendment) Bill, West Bengal University of Animal and Fishery Sciences (Amendment) Bill, West Bengal Private University Laws (Amendment) Bill, West Bengal Krishi Viswavidyalaya Laws, West Bengal University of Health Sciences (Amendment) Bill, and the Aliah University (Amendment) Bill. These were passed by the state assembly in 2022, with the West Bengal Town and Country (Planning and Development) (Amendment) Bill passed in 2023.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International